Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Voting Fraud

The Real-ID program does NOT require a birth  certificate or passport as a condition for voting.  It has more to do with legal residency and immigration status.  Legal status, not citizenship status.

As of yet, it does NOT confirm who is a citizen.

If it did, there would be little reason for Progs to claim it too onerous to present ID at time of voting, now, would there?


"The DHS final rule regarding implementation of the Real ID Act driver's license provisions relaxes, and in some instances waives altogether, these verification requirements of the Real ID Act. Thus the DHS rule concedes that there is no practical mechanism to verify with the issuers the validity of documents proving the applicant's primary address (such as a mortgage statement or a utility bill) and leaves the implementation of this verification requirement to discretion of the states (page 5297 of the DHS final rule in the Federal Register). However, the DHS rule, Section 37.11(c), mandates that the Real ID license applicants be required to present at least two documents documenting the address of their primary residence."

"Among the 2008 presidential candidates, according to a February 2008 CNet report at news.com, John McCain strongly supported the Real ID Act, Barack Obama and Ron Paul flatly opposed it, while Hillary Clinton called for the law to be reviewed.[86] In a September 2007 interview Mike Huckabee expressed opposition to the Real ID Act, calling the Real ID Act "a huge mistake"."


So what is this "proof of citizenship"?  Is it a certified birth certificate, or is it only an attestation of legal residence?  As if the person that lied to enter the nation would not lie to obtain documentation, welfare, or employment.


"Federal and state lack of interest in election offenses is not an indication that noncitizen voting is a minor problem. It is only an indication that election authorities are failing to prosecute violators. Inattention to the phenomenon of noncitizen voting and a failure to impose effective penalties against those who cast votes fraudulently has rendered laws against such activity a paper tiger, without deterrent effect. If the problem is allowed to continue, it will inevitably lead to questions about whether the results of U.S. elections truly reflect the political inclinations of the American people."

"There is enough evidence of noncitizen voting to indicate that it is an ongoing problem that may have a significant effect on American electoral poitics. Due to the low risk of penalty, and the lack of effective controls, alien voting is easy. In states without ID requirements, the only check against noncitizens registering to vote is a box on the application form asking registrants to confirm they are U.S. citizens. Given the fact that this affirmation is rarely verified and few violators are ever prosecuted, it is a pointless exercise that does nothing to deter voter fraud. In states with voter ID requirements, the lack of a single, standardized document that demonstrates both identity and citizenship makes voter fraud all too easy"


Andrew Napolitano has said that, “If you are an illegal alien in California, get a driver’s license, register to vote, you can vote in local, state, and federal elections in California and those votes count.”  If an illegal alien gets a California driver's license by showing proof of identity that does not include citizenship, and does not opt out of voter registration, then he can vote, even though it is not legal for him to do so. 

Absent something more than an office audit, how would authorities know?


The really indecent travesty was the cronycrat establishment using the gov and its corporate fascists specifically to try to elect a fellow cronycrat.
How much of what Wikileaks provided was info that should have been divulged by Hillary pursuant to Congressional investigation? What is Hillary complaining about? That she would not have been caught lying and trying to sell the republic down the river if it had not been for Wikileaks and the Russians? Good grief! Progs tend to have very serious and incurable mental disorders.



"Right now, California licenses do not comply with the federal Real ID law. It's a set standard for identification that was enacted by Congress in 2005 as part of an effort to crack down on the potential for terrorists and criminals to obtain state-issued ID's, according to the Department of Homeland Security."

"The Department of Homeland Security is now giving states until January 2018 to get up to speed, unless the state has filed an extension.  California was approved for an extension, allowing the state to become compliant by 2020."



Former Department of Justice official J. Christian Adams has revealed in a recent study that non-citizens are all over the voter registration rolls in the Old Dominion and could easily make the difference in this election.
So today we learn that in the key swing state of Virginia, voter registration rolls have been polluted with an excess of a thousand aliens, and most certainly far more. This detailed study by the Public Interest Legal Foundation (which I assisted on) documents more than one thousand aliens on the voter rolls. It provides the government documents with the names.
Here’s the most frightening part: the sample is only eight Virginia counties and doesn’t include the behemoths of Arlington and Fairfax Counties. I’ll get to why that information is being concealed by election officials in a moment below.
Last week I interviewed Adams on WMAL in Washington DC. Listen to his report and then ask yourself: “Why didn’t President Obama clearly and unambiguously condemn even the notion of non-citizens voting in this election?”


NUMBERS: No one knows how many undocumented illegals are really in the U.S.  At best, what we have are educated guesses.  http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/how-do-we-know-how-many-undocumented-immigrants-there-are/.
WEIGHING RISKS:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/23/criminal-prosecution-immigrants-cost_n_3323181.html: "Illegal entry into the United States is a misdemeanor; reentry after deportation is a felony. Yet the prosecutory measures to dissuade illegal immigration don’t usually fulfill their purpose since many of those entering are doing so to reunite with their family."



"[T]he US Supreme Court has ruled that illegal immigrants cannot be prosecuted for identity theft if they use "made-up" social security numbers that they do not know belong to someone else; to be guilty of identity theft with regard to social security numbers, they must know that the social security numbers that they use belong to others."

"[I]n 2013 the California State Legislature passed laws allowing illegal immigrants to obtain professional licenses. On February 1, 2014. Sergio C. Garcia became the first illegal immigrant to be admitted to the State Bar of California...."

"Before 2007, immigration authorities alerted employers of mismatches between reported employees' Social Security cards and the actual names of the card holders. On September 1, 2007, a federal judge halted this practice of alerting employers of card mismatches. At times illegal hiring has not been prosecuted aggressively: between 1999 and 2003, according to The Washington Post, "work-site enforcement operations were scaled back 95 percent by the Immigration and Naturalization Service...."

"According to the US Department of Homeland Security and the Border Patrol Enforcement Integrated Database, apprehensions have increased from 955,310 in 2002 to 1,159,802 in 2004. "But fewer than 4 percent of apprehended migrants were actually detained and prosecuted for illegal entry, partly because it costs $90 a day to keep them in detention facilities and bed space is very limited. For the remainder of the apprehended migrants, if they are willing to sign a form attesting that they are voluntarily
repatriating themselves, they are simply bussed to a gate on the
, where they re-enter Mexico.""

CALIFORNIA MOTOR VOTER:  Judge Andrew Napolitano has said that, “If you are an illegal alien in California, get a driver’s license, register to vote, you can vote in local, state, and federal elections in California and those votes count.”  If an illegal alien gets a California driver's license by showing proof of identity that does not include citizenship, and does not opt out of voter registration, then he can vote, even though it is not legal for him to do so.  Absent something more than an office audit, how would authorities know?


Stephen Ansolabehere says, “We asked people in successive years their citizenship. That minimizes the error. Upon doing so we find NO INSTANCES of voting among people stating consistently that they are non-citizens.” 

DUH:  Well, duh!  The people that voted illegally did not admit to being non-citizens.  Surprise, surprise!  Illegals that did vote would not do so in their own names.  Illegals would vote under fake identities showing fake addresses.  What's the risk in that compared with the risk of failing to cooperate with La Raza?  What's the chance of being caught, in the absence of more determined field investigations?  Why suppose La Raza and its NWO funders would be so stupid as to use frauds that could be easily exposed by a mere office audit?

Progs have argued that, "You’d have to know the person you were
impersonating hadn’t voted yet, and that the person at the poll doesn’t know that person, she said. And in a busload of people, you’d have to count on every one of them keeping quiet."

Well, it's easy to know whether an invented identity has voted or not. It's easy to keep co-conspirators quiet once you have a file on them showing their histories of accepting illegal bribes. It's easy to threaten them concerning their relatives. Ward machines have much experience. I would not blithely accept a glib representataion by a stupid or anti-American Prog that the likelihood of a dishonest poll watcher told to look the other way is low. Especially given long periods for early voting and for absentee mail in voting. If you profile to pay the right people, the odds of them voting for a Republican are what diminish towards nil. 


As to those that overstay their visas, they have by that act already taken a risk.   http://immigration.lawyers.com/visas/what-happens-when-you-overstay-your-visa.html: "You're also accruing what is known, in legal terms, as "unlawful presence" in the United States. A period of 180 days or more of unlawful presence makes you "inadmissible" to the United States. That means that you will not be granted a visa, green card (lawful permanent residence), or other immigration benefit for a period of either three or ten years, depending on how long you overstayed. An overstay of between 180 and 365 days results in a three-year bar on reentry; an overstay of over 365 days results in a ten-year bar on reentry."

"Immigration agents catch an abysmally small percentage of the illegal immigrants who arrived on visas but overstayed their welcome, authorities admitted to Congress Tuesday, describing a loophole that those around the globe are increasingly using to gain a foothold in the U.S.
At least 480,000 people overstayed their visas last year, adding to a backlog that’s reached some 5 million total, members of Congress said. But immigration agents launched investigations into just 10,000 of them, or about 0.2 percent, and arrested fewer than 2,000, less than 0.04 percent, saying the others don’t rise to the level of being priority targets."

As to those that illegally reenter after having been removed or deported, their illegal reentry has already subjected them to risk of felony prosecution. http://immigration.findlaw.com/deportation-removal/illegal-reentry-into-the-u-s-after-removal-crime-and-punishment.html.

So, by a process of SELF SELECTION, they have already shown willingness to risk prosecution.


"The Obama administration has a two-pronged approach to enforcing our immigration laws with respect to the estimated total of 10.5 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States:

It is committed to deporting: a) illegal immigrants who have committed serious crimes, b) previously deported individuals who return to the United States illegally, and c) illegal immigrants it deems national security threats."

"It is committed to not deporting all other illegal immigrants who have taken up residence in the United States despite the fact that their presence is contrary to existing law. All crimes incidental to living and working illegally in the United States, such as identity theft, using false documentation, and driving without a license or insurance are not considered serious enough to qualify for deportation."

"The deportation of criminal immigrants usually takes place after the completion of any sentences associated with their criminal convictions."

"[M]any border intercepts ordinarily in the Border Patrol's domain were transferred to ICE in order to inflate the total number of deportations (and to make it seem like the administration is being tougher on illegal immigration than it is)."

"43,307 of the 2011 deportees had been deported previously and were not categorized as criminals. Since illegal reentry to the United States by a deportee is a felony under federal law (Title 8 U.S.C. 1326), the 43,307 must have been deported again without being charged with the reentry felony because they were not considered "criminal" deportees in the 2011 data."

"The high percentage of repeat deportees is due in part to the ease of reentry to the United States for earlier deportees and the knowledge that if apprehended there is only a small chance that they will serve any prison time for that illegally reentry. Prosecutions for illegal reentry fall into the domain of the U.S. Attorneys' offices, which would probably argue that too much of their resources would be tied up in such prosecutions if they prosecuted everyone they could for illegal reentry. It is administratively convenient to just deport again without prosecution for reentry because this can be done without a court hearing. Besides, the total number of deportees who were apprehended after they reentered the country is so high — a minimum of 130,006 for 2011, that federal courts and federal prisons would be overburdened if all who could be were prosecuted and sentenced for illegal reentry."

"It should be noted that once a deportee completes an illegal reentry to our country, in nearly all cases the deportee will go undetected unless charged with another crime or if the deportee returns to his old neighborhood and is recognized by local law enforcement officials. Thus, the number of deportees who make an illegal reentry is possibly much higher than indicated by the reinstatement data."

"The reentry of previously deported criminals is a source of frustration for local law enforcement officials in metropolitan areas with significant illegal immigrant populations. This is reflected in the testimony of Leroy D. Baca, Sheriff of Los Angeles County, which he identified as having the "largest illegal immigrant population in America". When he testified before Congress in 2006, he estimated that 40 percent of inmates in the custody of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department were illegal immigrants. Of these, he estimated that 70 percent were repeat offenders and that more than half were multiple repeat offenders.  Sheriff Baca further mentioned that, in a study of criminals who were incarcerated by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, it was found that over a five-year period "70 percent of those deported after serving time reentered the country and were rearrested again".

"The revolving door is, in effect, sped up in the case of those criminal illegal immigrants whose native countries do not cooperate with our deportation efforts. While being processed for deportation, illegal immigrants can generally be held in detention in the United States for only six months when not serving jail time for a crime. The six-month limitation is due to two Supreme Court cases in 2001 and 2005.  After six-months, nearly all illegal immigrants, including convicted criminals who may have served time for their crimes, must be released onto the streets of America. ICE reports that, since 2008, about 4,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records have been released into our country each year due to reluctant receiving countries and the Supreme Court limitations on detention."

"The Department of Homeland Security, which supervises the government entities charged with enforcing our immigration laws, justifies not enforcing the nation's immigration laws for illegal immigrants living in the United States who do not commit serious crimes by saying it is "prioritizing" enforcement since it "only has resources to remove approximately 400,000 aliens per year, less than 4 percent of the estimated illegal alien population in the United States"."
"Since the Border Patrol does not separately report their returned aliens as criminals and since these returns are not counted as deportations, none of their numbers are included in the deportation or criminal deportation data in Simanski and Sapp and the data of this report."

MANY SCHEMES:  There is another scheme that entails identifying registered voters not voting on Election Day and forging ballots in their names.  To uncover that scheme would require that they be caught in the act or that there be an extensive field audit of a kind that is unlikely to occur.  Other schemes not uncovered by office audits would entail abuses and bribes via busings and nursing homes.

SHOW ME A CASE:  Yes, there would be risk for a documented person to engage in registering undocumented voters.  But show me a case where an undocumented Illegal voted and then was convicted and jailed or deported on account of it!  It's the disincentives to discover the fraud that are enormous!  If your ambition is to succeed with the Establishment, you don't bite at its open border policy.


The Prog Regime turns people back at the borders, or processes guilty pleas, or expedites removals without criminal prosecutions.  But it has shown little inclination for prosecuting people as criminals based either on illegal status or on undocumented voting.  To argue that a Prog Regime would want to spend resources prosecuting the very people whose votes it encouraged and bought may be the height of counterintuitive stupidity or malice.

There are no "enormous" disincentives against illegal migration, nor against La Raza openly encouraging and plotting reconquista.  http://humanevents.com/2006/04/07/emexclusive-emthe-truth-about-la-raza/:
 “For The Race everything. Outside The Race, nothing.”  "Members of these radical, anti-American, racist organizations are frequently smoothly polished into public respectability by the National Council of La Raza." See also http://rightwingnews.com/elections-polls/la-raza-pushing-illegals-voting-states-id-requirements/.

Indeed, the Secretary of the Interior has been a son of one of the originators of La Raza.  It is easy for a local La Raza thug to make an illegal an offer he cannot refuse:   Help by voting or face consequences of exposure.  Clue:   Many illegals were  inadmissible at the time they illegally entered.

There's little evidence of fraudulently registered people voting, because the Regime does not want to look for it.  That would fly in the face of the NWO's push for open borders.

Many Illegals laugh at your "risk" of "deportatable" offenses.  Many are deported multiple times.  Or, if given notice to appear in court, they simply relocate their base of operations.

OBVIOUS DUPLICITY OF ESTABLISHMENT:  The Establishment (that owns Factcheck) has spent millions of dollars pushing for open, porous, or unenforced borders.  Only an idiot or a devil would argue it has done that because it really wants to investigate voting fraud by illegals.

REGARDING WHAT OBAMA ENCOURAGED WITH GINA RODRIGUEZ: The premise of the question Gina Rodriguez posed to him was concern for what would happen to illegals ("undocumented citizens -- and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country -- are fearful of voting") that voted. That was the question to which Obama responded. The fact that he went further and consented to calling her and/or them "citizens" indicates either that he would encourage citizenship rights to vote even for illegals or that he deliberately declined to clear up confusion by discouraging non-citizens from voting. The question related to concern about the effects of getting caught! Which Obama assured were nil. Obama assured there would be no immigration backlash.

WHY PROGS CAN COUNT ON ILLEGALS TO VOTE FOR THEM:  There are reasons why Illegals would almost always vote for
  Prog dupes and devils want a porous border!  They don't want to deport.  They want to extend Constitutional rights to all residents, including illegals.  They don't want voter ID. They call people that want the border enforced xenophobes.  They are hypocrites about challenging the vote results.  Their handlers own Factcheck.  They want to farm the masses by bribing those that are most stupid, most desperate, or most corrupt.  They don't want to improve ghettos; they want to expand them.  Ghettos are an important base for their power and race-baiting livelihood.  They approve of plotting with or appointing agents of La Raza, CPUSA, CAIR, BLM, Glsen, Weather Underground, etc. The truth is simply not in them.  Neither is common sense or basic decency.


"New York City’s watchdog Department of Investigations has just provided the latest evidence of how easy it is to commit voter fraud that is almost undetectable. DOI undercover agents showed up at 63 polling places last fall and pretended to be voters who should have been turned away by election officials; the agents assumed the names of individuals who had died or moved out of town, or who were sitting in jail. In 61 instances, or 97 percent of the time, the testers were allowed to vote. Those who did vote cast only a write-in vote for a “John Test” so as to not affect the outcome of any contest. DOI published its findings two weeks ago in a searing 70-page report accusing the city’s Board of Elections of incompetence, waste, nepotism, and lax procedures."

(MY NOTE:  Nothing suggests that any criminal complaint was attempted against the agents that were turned away.)

"In 1984, Brooklyn’s Democratic district attorney, Elizabeth Holtzman, released a state grand-jury report on a successful 14-year conspiracy that cast thousands of fraudulent votes in local, state, and congressional elections. Just like the DOI undercover operatives, the conspirators cast votes at precincts in the names of dead, moved, and bogus voters. The grand jury recommended voter ID, a basic election-integrity measure that New York has steadfastly refused to implement."

"In 2012, the son of Congressman Jim Moran, the Democrat who represents Virginia’s Washington suburbs, had to resign as field director for his father’s campaign after it became clear that he had encouraged voter fraud. Patrick Moran was caught advising an O’Keefe videographer on how to commit in-person voter fraud. The scheme involved using a personal computer to forge utility bills that would satisfy Virginia’s voter-ID law and then relying on the assistance of Democratic lawyers stationed at the polls to make sure the fraudulent votes were counted."

"Given that someone who is dead, is in jail, or has moved isn’t likely to complain if someone votes in his name, how do we know that voter fraud at the polls isn’t a problem?"

Would devils devoted to taking people's freedom and dignity in exchange for the phony security of the collective --- given the means, motive, and opportunity --- commit such evil?  Yes, they would.


For many years, various States (especially Southern) had to obtain advance approval from Federal overseers in the defining of their legislative districts. Partisan gerrymandering (based on racial profiling) probably contributes to ghettoization of inner cities and can be used to quickly turn a State red or blue. http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/11/test-on-partisan-gerrymandering-heads-to-supreme-court/.

Texas endured considerable Federal oversight of its partisan gerrymandering, such as in the switch from a Republican Governor to Ann Richards, the Democrat, then back again to the Republicans, when GWB defeated Richards. Texas' redistricting in 2003 led to a Republican majority in the State House for the first time since Reconstruction. Since then, nearly all statewide political positions in Texas are now held by Republicans.

However, given changing demographics, all such gains could be quickly swept aside, and new partisan gerrymandering could turn Texas hard blue, as in the case of California. No doubt, Dems returning to power would profile to re-gerrymander to try to reproduce a Dem majority.

If that happens, given the electoral power of Texas, California, and New Yori, the representative republic as a whole will be buried by the elitist ruled NWO for many, many years.

Rino cronycrat oligarchs are not really motivated to resist that. Indeed, that is precisely what many Rino cronycrats want!  If that is a shadow of things to come, it must be resisted by enough Ebenezers (Trump?) come to see the light.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Texas_redistricting: "At the time of the 2003 redistricting, Texas was under the pre-clearance requirements of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act."

"Under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Texas and other states with a history of discriminatory elections are required to submit changes in their voting systems or election maps for approval by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division."

Under Federal oversight, Texas had the burden of "showing that the proposed congressional redistricting plan does not have a discriminatory effect."

Bottom line issue: Given the Reconstruction Amendments and the Voting Rights Act, and given the recent lawless behavior in DC of deliberately failing to enforce the border, would it be unreasonable or unconstitutional to enact, as you said, "a national law that States with laws that allow voting by noncitizens, or the dead, or by multistate voters, are considered to be fraudulent voting states whether they are PROVEN to be voting fraudulently or not"? 

Should States without reasonably effective voter ID have the burden to show that their elections, in the absence of such voter ID, are not significantly corrupted by fraud?  Especially given blue States unwillingness to provide an adequate paper trail and the difficulty of proving a negative, why should challengers have the burden to show what common sense fairly shouts:  That lack of voter ID attracts and produces significant fraud?


So long as kiddies have their safe spaces, they like to pretend that the adults are always wrong and that every enlightened kiddie knows it. That way, they can exchange high 5's as they pass by one another on their various travels through the diaper rooms that they pretend to be college clasrooms.
The more they claim adults are wrong, the more the high 5's. Wearing a Castro or Che shirt is an opportunity for solidarity and to identify with other "enlightened" infants. Obama's diapers will burst if he cannot contrive a way to be part of the Castro funeral celebration. Failure to grow past infantilism probably contributes to Progs' fecal conflations with sexual deviances.

No comments: