[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
(s)Elections See other (s)Elections Articles Title: Vote Fraud Monitoring Group Says Three Million Noncitizens Voted in Presidential Election An organization formed back in 1996 to publicize computerized vote fraud, and which continues to monitor election results to detect vote fraud, has issued a statement that it has uncovered evidence of more than three million people who are not U.S. citizens casting votes in this past presidential election. Gregg Phillips, spokesman for the VoteFraud.org organization, recently tweeted that after completing an analysis of a database of 180 million voter registrations, “We have verified more than three million votes cast by non-citizens.” Phillips also tweeted that VoteFraud.org (which is affiliated with the Cincinnati-based Citizens for a Fair Vote Count) is joining with a Houston-based organization called True the Vote to initiate legal action against those responsible for the fraudulent voting. While this may seem like a moot point, since Republican nominee Donald Trump has already accumulated more than enough electoral votes to win the election and was only a tiny fraction behind Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the popular vote count, there are reasons why the charge of vote fraud is important and, if found to be credible, should be exposed. For one thing, if allowed to go unchallenged, vote fraud by noncitizens not entitled to cast votes could perpetuate itself and affect the outcome of future elections. The integrity of our voting system is at stake. Second, many of the violent protests that have taken place across our nation since Trump’s victory have been fueled, in part, by the claim that Trump’s victory was not “democratic,” since his share of the popular vote was smaller than Clinton’s. Although such objections fly in the face of history and the Constitution, the psychology behind them still exists. If the charges made by VoteFraud.org hold up, there is a strong possibility that Trump may have won the popular vote after all. A report of the group's finding posted by infowars.com observed: According to current indications, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by around 630,000 votes, although around 7 million ballots remain uncounted. Virtually all of the votes cast by 3 million illegal immigrants are likely to have been for Hillary Clinton, meaning Trump might have won the popular vote when this number is taken into account. True the Vote, the organization with which VoteFraud.org is joining in filing legal action related to alleged voter fraud in the 2016 election, has a history of such activism. During the 2010 election cycle, the organization asserted that it had uncovered numerous examples of voter fraud in Harris County (Houston), Texas. It offered, as examples: “Vacant lots had several voters registered on them. An eight-bed halfway house had more than 40 voters registered at its address.” In 2012, True the Vote joined several other Tea Party groups in “Verify the Recall,” an effort that opposed the attempted recall of Wisconsin governor Scott Walker in the Wisconsin gubernatorial recall election. The organization’s website has run several stories suggesting that fraud was “rampant” in the recall effort, and depicted the effort as decidedly political, saying that “we should not believe the claims of union-supporters and anti-Walker operatives who say that they collected more than one million signatures on petitions to recall Governor Scott Walker.” In February 2013, True the Vote filed a federal lawsuit against St. Lucie County, Florida, elections supervisor Gertrude Walker, claiming that she had failed to turn over public records related to the U.S. House of Representatives election race between Republican Allen West and Democrat Patrick Murphy. Murphy had won by a margin of 2,429 votes. True the Vote stated that withholding the documents violated the 1993 Motor Voter Law, which granted them permission to “publicly inspect and examine all voter registration and election records” in question. Last February, during a roundtable discussion with National Border Patrol Council members inside Trump Tower, Art Del Cueto, national vice president of the union that represents Border Patrol agents, told Trump that agents have been advised not to deport illegal immigrants with criminal records. Del Cueto cited a pool report. Politico reported that Del Cueto told Trump that he has spoken to a number of agents who are in charge of processing. “And the problem that we’re seeing reflected through us as a voice is that some of these individuals that were apprehended with criminal records, they’re not, they’re checking their records, they see that they have criminal records, but they’re setting them aside because at this point they are saying immigration is so tied up with trying to get the people who are on the waiting list to hurry up and get them their immigration status corrected,” the union leader continued. “Why?” Trump asked. To which Del Cuerto replied: “So they can go ahead and vote before the election.” “Big statement, fellas,” Trump said, addressing the reporters present, suggesting that they would not report what they just heard. “You’re not going to write it. That’s huge. But they’re letting people pour into the country so they can go and vote.” The same day that Politico reported the above exchange, The New American ran an article about the Obama administration’s attempts to enable illegal aliens to cast ballots. Part of this attempt was made through the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), which was created in order to help states comply with the National Voter Registration Act, despite the fact that the 17th Amendment of the Constitution explicitly says that the states have the power to set the “qualification requisite for electors.” The article cited a case brought by a collection of leftist groups against the state of Arizona when that state wanted to include citizenship-verification requirements with voter-registration forms. The case went to the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2013 that while the EAC would have to agree to any voter-verification changes to the federal form before they could be made, Arizona could sue the agency if it refused to implement changes. Arizona then made the request for the changes, but it was denied by a single EAC bureaucrat, Alice Miller, who was merely the acting executive director at the time. The EAC reversed Miller’s decision and allowed states to include the citizenship-verification requirements with the federal voter-registration form, but leftists then filed another lawsuit in D.C. federal court to reverse the reversal! The court case resulted in a veritable three ring circus, during which the Obama administration DOJ engaged in tactics and stunts that all but outraged the judge in the case. As the author of the article, Selwyn Duke, summed things up: And all this is just so illegals can vote in our elections — which is happening. In fact, a 2014 study found that enough non-citizens cast ballots to influence close races. It’s no surprise that Democrats have steadfastly opposed voter-ID measures, either (even though identification is required for most everything else, from receiving government benefits to visiting the White House). Seventy to ninety percent of legal immigrants vote Democrat upon naturalization, and the figure for illegal migrants is at the upper end of that range. [Emphasis in original.] Given the lengths to which the Obama administration has gone to make it easier for illegal aliens to vote, the assertions made by Gregg Phillips of VoteFraud.org do not seem incredible at all. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||