U.S. officials see no evidence of foreign meddling with mail-in ballots

[rcummings]

21 minutes ago, connda said:

It really doesn't matter.  Since Citizens United vs FEC (more aptly named Corporations United) important elections goes to whoever is given the most money by large institutional donors, although sometimes someone squeaks though the cracks and upsets the apple cart  ????  maga <laughs>. 

Last time that apple cart got upset was in 2008. In the wake of the elections, taxes on the rich actually went up. But since 2016 and all the tax breaks that the current administration has blessed the wealthy with, the cart is upright and trundling along. The trouble is that now it's piled so high with apples that sooner or later it's got to collapse under their weight.

[Tippaporn]

I think foreign meddling with mail-in ballots is not a huge threat to this election.  What is a much greater threat, in my opinion, is domestic meddling with mail-in ballots.  To that end let me entry into the record this eye-popping, must-read article.

 

The New York Post - Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots

 

If there was ever an article which I would love to reprint in it's entirety this one would be it.  So very hard to choose what to quote out of it but I'll provide a single teaser.

 

“This is a real thing,” he said. “And there is going to be a f–king war coming November 3rd over this stuff … If they knew how the sausage was made, they could fix it.”

 

The article is broken into fraud categories; Phony ballots, Inside jobs, Nursing homes, Voter impersonation, and Bribing voters.

 

Now I ask, how many news articles have we all seen here giving mention to Trump warning of mail-in ballot fraud with the take-my-word-for-it qualifier "without evidence?"

 

You might also want to ask yourselves, how many of these same people are out there all over the country doing the exact same?  Focusing on Russia or any other country seems to be a "Look over there!!  Squirrel!!" tactic.  The greatest danger to the election process isn't from without but from within.

[Tippaporn]

What is ballot harvesting, which so many Dem states advocate for?  Here are two divergent viewpoints.  Given the New York Post article I posted above which of the two viewpoints would you consider to be the accurate one?

 

Fox News - What is ballot harvesting?

 

Ballot harvesting, or the practice of allowing political operatives and others to collect voters’ ballots and turn them in en masse to polling stations, has drawn bipartisan concerns of fraud from election watchers.

 

The Washington Post - What is ballot ‘harvesting,’ and why is Trump so against it?

 

It’s a practice in which a voter fills out an absentee ballot, seals it in an envelope and does all the required security checks, like signing the back of the envelope so election experts can verify who voted. Then they entrust it to another person, who drops off the ballot at a mail center or ballot drop-off location.

 

California Gov. Jerry Brown legalized ballot harvesting in 2016.  A lot of Republicans held substantial leads in the 2018 election only to see those leads disappear as late-arriving Democratic votes were counted in the weeks following the election.  Some say ballot harvesting was the key to Dem success.  Again, now view this case in light of what you've just read in the New York Post article.

 

Cue all those posters who will adamantly refute/spin/deny/minimize/etc. that there's no way fraud is possible via ballot harvesting and neither can there be fraud with mail-in ballots.  Okay, okay, maybe a few cases here and there but . . . 

[Tippaporn]

Imagine this type of mess occurring in a National Presidential Election.  Imagine the endless litigation which would ensue.  Joe Biden's campaign has already hire 600 lawyers.  Electors must, by law, meet on Dec. 19th to cast their Electoral College votes.  What happens when States do not provide the vote to elector?  They would be in jeopardy of Congress rejecting their Electoral votes.  If this happens to many States and the 270 electoral requirement is not satisfied by any candidate then the resolution would be, as explained in Wikipedia:

 

Contingent presidential election by House

The Twelfth Amendment requires the House of Representatives to go into session immediately to vote for a president if no candidate for president receives a majority of the electoral votes (since 1964, 270 of the 538 electoral votes).

 

Who controls the House?

 

Does it now make sense that Hillary Clinton advised Biden in a recent interview to "not concede under any circumstances?"

 

The New York Post, Aug. 20, 2020 - Over 80,000 mail-in ballots disqualified in NYC primary mess

 

One out of four mail-in ballots were disqualified for arriving late, lacking a postmark or failing to include a voter’s signature, or other defects.

 

Now consider the Dems all-out push for mail-in ballots.  Now consider again the New York Post article I posted above in light of all this information.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

I think foreign meddling with mail-in ballots is not a huge threat to this election.  What is a much greater threat, in my opinion, is domestic meddling with mail-in ballots.  To that end let me entry into the record this eye-popping, must-read article.

 

The New York Post - Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots

 

If there was ever an article which I would love to reprint in it's entirety this one would be it.  So very hard to choose what to quote out of it but I'll provide a single teaser.

 

“This is a real thing,” he said. “And there is going to be a f–king war coming November 3rd over this stuff … If they knew how the sausage was made, they could fix it.”

 

The article is broken into fraud categories; Phony ballots, Inside jobs, Nursing homes, Voter impersonation, and Bribing voters.

 

Now I ask, how many news articles have we all seen here giving mention to Trump warning of mail-in ballot fraud with the take-my-word-for-it qualifier "without evidence?"

 

You might also want to ask yourselves, how many of these same people are out there all over the country doing the exact same?  Focusing on Russia or any other country seems to be a "Look over there!!  Squirrel!!" tactic.  The greatest danger to the election process isn't from without but from within.

I generally qualify my posts with "no evidence of fraud that could affect state or national elections". 

 

From your source:

 

“An election that is swayed by 500 votes, 1,000 votes — it can make a difference,” the tipster said. “It could be enough to flip states.”

 

Note that no example was given of 1000 votes flipping a state.  Also, he was caught.  The Post verified "his rap sheet".  Plus the overall tone of the article, and the publisher, give the impression of an insignificant person exaggerating his accomplishments to people who lack proper skepticism because they want to believe him.

 

For this kind of small scale fraud to change election it would have to a coordinated campaign by thousands or tens of thousands of fraudsters who would be risking serious prison time for an uncertain outcome and no personal gain.  And they'd have to do that without being caught.  That seems extremely unlikely.

 

I continue to maintain that the damage to democracy from requiring people to show up at understaffed polling stations during a pandemic, which would dissuade a large number of voters, is far greater than the negligible risk of mail-in voting fraud.

Edited September 1, 2020 by heybruce

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Imagine this type of mess occurring in a National Presidential Election.  Imagine the endless litigation which would ensue.  Joe Biden's campaign has already hire 600 lawyers.  Electors must, by law, meet on Dec. 19th to cast their Electoral College votes.  What happens when States do not provide the vote to elector?  They would be in jeopardy of Congress rejecting their Electoral votes.  If this happens to many States and the 270 electoral requirement is not satisfied by any candidate then the resolution would be, as explained in Wikipedia:

 

Contingent presidential election by House

The Twelfth Amendment requires the House of Representatives to go into session immediately to vote for a president if no candidate for president receives a majority of the electoral votes (since 1964, 270 of the 538 electoral votes).

 

Who controls the House?

 

Does it now make sense that Hillary Clinton advised Biden in a recent interview to "not concede under any circumstances?"

 

The New York Post, Aug. 20, 2020 - Over 80,000 mail-in ballots disqualified in NYC primary mess

 

One out of four mail-in ballots were disqualified for arriving late, lacking a postmark or failing to include a voter’s signature, or other defects.

 

Now consider the Dems all-out push for mail-in ballots.  Now consider again the New York Post article I posted above in light of all this information.

Potentially endless litigation over a states election result?  Been there, done that.  Remember the 2000 election?

 

The count will be finished before the constitutionally mandated date for the electors to meet.  Votes that arrive late and absentee ballots that are not properly filled out will be accepted or rejected according to the rules of the states.  A candidate can file as many nuisances suits as he likes, but the election and its results will not be prevented.

[Tippaporn]

5 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I think that if a suspicious number of absentee ballots are not received there will be an investigation.  If the investigation shows that mail carriers were deliberately not delivering ballots they will be fired, lose benefits, and face criminal prosecution.

 

If you want to imagine vote stifling crimes, why not just imagine gun men showing up at polling stations, seizing ballots and destroying equipment?

Thank you, heybruce.  After reading that New York Post article, along with all of the other information I've been running across, I was truly beginning to get worried.  Thank you again for putting my mind at ease with your solid guarantees that nothing would, and more importantly, could affect the National Election.

[Logosone]

We need to cast our minds back to the Bush vs Gore election. Bush won Florida with 537 votes, so obviously mail fraud in the amount of 1000 votes can decide a presidential election. 

 

The notion that this is unlikely is contradicted by the reality that the Bush vs Gore election saw 47 lawsuits related to the election filed in Florida, and a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court decided the matter.

 

Clearly the coming election will see major issues with voter counting.

 

We have seen that some people are willing to go to extremes like physical violence in order to try and stop Trump from being re-elected, and indeed Biden then hypocritically blaming the violence perpetrated by anarchists on Trump.

 

Clearly there is nothing some people will not do to stop Trump being re-elected.

 

Obviously Trump is quite worried about it because he has little influence on the process of voting itself.

 

If this election is stolen from Trump through underhand means it will come out though.

[heybruce]

19 minutes ago, Logosone said:

We need to cast our minds back to the Bush vs Gore election. Bush won Florida with 537 votes, so obviously mail fraud in the amount of 1000 votes can decide a presidential election. 

 

The notion that this is unlikely is contradicted by the reality that the Bush vs Gore election saw 47 lawsuits related to the election filed in Florida, and a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court decided the matter.

 

Clearly the coming election will see major issues with voter counting.

 

We have seen that some people are willing to go to extremes like physical violence in order to try and stop Trump from being re-elected, and indeed Biden then hypocritically blaming the violence perpetrated by anarchists on Trump.

 

Clearly there is nothing some people will not do to stop Trump being re-elected.

 

Obviously Trump is quite worried about it because he has little influence on the process of voting itself.

 

If this election is stolen from Trump through underhand means it will come out though.

"We have seen that some people are willing to go to extremes like physical violence in order to try and stop Trump from being re-elected..."

 

Really?  Care to give an example?

 

"Clearly the coming election will see major issues with voter counting."

 

Are you referring to the fact that it may take some states a few days to count mail-in ballots?  Why would this be a major issue?

 

"If this election is stolen from Trump through underhand means it will come out though."

 

Yes, it would come out if it happened.  That's why it won't happen.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, Tippaporn said:

Thank you, heybruce.  After reading that New York Post article, along with all of the other information I've been running across, I was truly beginning to get worried.  Thank you again for putting my mind at ease with your solid guarantees that nothing would, and more importantly, could affect the National Election.

I never posted that nothing would affect the election.  Voter disenfranchisement could definitely affect the election.  People giving up on voting because of long lines and understaffed polling stations that need to be carefully cleaned between votes could affect the election.  Unnecessarily restrictive deadlines for counting mail-in ballots could affect the election. 

 

However mail-in voter fraud on a scale large enough to affect a national election won't affect the election.  Regardless of what an anonymous New Jersy fraudster told a notoriously biased scandal rag.

[Tippaporn]

17 minutes ago, Logosone said:

We need to cast our minds back to the Bush vs Gore election. Bush won Florida with 537 votes, so obviously mail fraud in the amount of 1000 votes can decide a presidential election. 

 

The notion that this is unlikely is contradicted by the reality that the Bush vs Gore election saw 47 lawsuits related to the election filed in Florida, and a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court decided the matter.

 

Clearly the coming election will see major issues with voter counting.

 

We have seen that some people are willing to go to extremes like physical violence in order to try and stop Trump from being re-elected, and indeed Biden then hypocritically blaming the violence perpetrated by anarchists on Trump.

 

Clearly there is nothing some people will not do to stop Trump being re-elected.

 

Obviously Trump is quite worried about it because he has little influence on the process of voting itself.

 

If this election is stolen from Trump through underhand means it will come out though.

Brunolem describes what's really going on very succinctly in one of his posts:

 

It is indeed illogical, but it is the result of propaganda, notably from the mainstream media, which people tend to trust way too much. 

 

The problem with Trump is that he is not part of the political establishment, and therefore is considered unacceptable by the latter (both sides) never mind what he does. 

 

Biden on the other hand is the epitome of political establishment, never mind what he does... not! 

 

In a totally corrupted system, such as the one in D. C., potential troublemakers (drain the swamp) are not welcome, for they might expose the extent of the rot... 

 

The rot is deep and wide and that's what all of this is about in my opinion.  The corrupt are scared to death of being exposed and will go through any lengths to prevent it.

[Tippaporn]

6 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I never posted that nothing would affect the election.  Voter disenfranchisement could definitely affect the election.  People giving up on voting because of long lines and understaffed polling stations that need to be carefully cleaned between votes could affect the election.  Unnecessarily restrictive deadlines for counting mail-in ballots could affect the election. 

 

However mail-in voter fraud on a scale large enough to affect a national election won't affect the election.  Regardless of what an anonymous New Jersy fraudster told a notoriously biased scandal rag.

Again, I deeply appreciate your confidence.

[heybruce]

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Brunolem describes what's really going on very succinctly in one of his posts:

 

It is indeed illogical, but it is the result of propaganda, notably from the mainstream media, which people tend to trust way too much. 

 

The problem with Trump is that he is not part of the political establishment, and therefore is considered unacceptable by the latter (both sides) never mind what he does. 

 

Biden on the other hand is the epitome of political establishment, never mind what he does... not! 

 

In a totally corrupted system, such as the one in D. C., potential troublemakers (drain the swamp) are not welcome, for they might expose the extent of the rot... 

 

The rot is deep and wide and that's what all of this is about in my opinion.  The corrupt are scared to death of being exposed and will go through any lengths to prevent it.

"The corrupt are scared to death of being exposed and will go through any lengths to prevent it."

 

On that we agree.  Trump is terrified of losing the election and the protection the Presidency offers him.

[Morch]

49 minutes ago, Logosone said:

We need to cast our minds back to the Bush vs Gore election. Bush won Florida with 537 votes, so obviously mail fraud in the amount of 1000 votes can decide a presidential election. 

 

The notion that this is unlikely is contradicted by the reality that the Bush vs Gore election saw 47 lawsuits related to the election filed in Florida, and a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court decided the matter.

 

Clearly the coming election will see major issues with voter counting.

 

We have seen that some people are willing to go to extremes like physical violence in order to try and stop Trump from being re-elected, and indeed Biden then hypocritically blaming the violence perpetrated by anarchists on Trump.

 

Clearly there is nothing some people will not do to stop Trump being re-elected.

 

Obviously Trump is quite worried about it because he has little influence on the process of voting itself.

 

If this election is stolen from Trump through underhand means it will come out though.

 

"Clearly there is nothing some people will not do to stop Trump being re-elected."

 

And, clearly, there is nothing some people will not post to support Trump being re-elected.

Case in point, post above and many others.

 

 

 

[Morch]

On 8/27/2020 at 10:03 AM, Bluespunk said:

trump has already moved onto his next ridiculous claim

 

Trump challenges Biden to drug test before debate https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2020-53927766

 

What a sad little man he is

 

But will it be a TikTok challenge?

[Isaan sailor]

They can’t win big elections with in-person voting—so they push mail-in voting and vote harvesting.  Guess which party advocates this?

[Sujo]

2 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

They can’t win big elections with in-person voting—so they push mail-in voting and vote harvesting.  Guess which party advocates this?

Guess which party has been caught doing it.

 

Guess which party set up a committee to find such things at the last election and found nothing.

 

Guess which party had intel agencies say there is no problem.

[Scott]

Posts from You Tube have been removed along with replies.   Please post from credible sources.  

 

[PattayaJames]

See nothing has changed on this forum in the last 4 years. 

[shdmn]

Yes, nothing to see here.  Just locker room data leaks of every voter in Michigan.

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2020/09/01/russian-hackers-leak-personal-data-of-nearly-every-voter-in-michigan-plus-a-million-more-voters-in-four-other-states
 

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

They can’t win big elections with in-person voting—so they push mail-in voting and vote harvesting.  Guess which party advocates this?

Do you think in-person voting is more democratic than other legitimate forms of voting?  Do you think in-person voting is more reliable than mail-in voting?  The 2000 election fiasco was caused by the count of in-person votes, not absentee ballots.

[candide]

8 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

They can’t win big elections with in-person voting—so they push mail-in voting and vote harvesting.  Guess which party advocates this?

What makes you think they can't win? This is completely incoherent!

They won the midterm elections by a landslide  and currently trail Trump in most polls.

It's Trump who needs to rigg elections in order to be elected.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 8/28/2020 at 4:44 PM, RocketDog said:

The election process failed in 2016 when the popular vote was ignored. 

Dump the electoral college then voter fraud would be insignificant noise. 

Do you actually understand the electoral college is in the constitution and that it's not possible to just "dump" it? Perhaps do some research on how to amend the constitution before making simplistic comments that are divorced from reality, IMO.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

Do you think in-person voting is more democratic than other legitimate forms of voting?  Do you think in-person voting is more reliable than mail-in voting?  The 2000 election fiasco was caused by the count of in-person votes, not absentee ballots.

Oh, I thought the 2000 election fiasco was caused by hanging chads. Guess I've been wrong all these years.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, candide said:

What makes you think they can't win? This is completely incoherent!

They won the midterm elections by a landslide  and currently trail Trump in most polls.

It's Trump who needs to rigg elections in order to be elected.

They won the midterm elections by a landslide  and currently trail Trump in most polls.

LOL.

[thaibeachlovers]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

"Clearly there is nothing some people will not do to stop Trump being re-elected."

 

And, clearly, there is nothing some people will not post to support Trump being re-elected.

Case in point, post above and many others.

 

 

 

Anonymous posts on TVF will have zero effect on the elections in the US, regardless of anyone's opinion.

[candide]

25 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

They won the midterm elections by a landslide  and currently trail Trump in most polls.

LOL.

Exactly! You can check here!

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

Edited September 1, 2020 by candide

[thaibeachlovers]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

Exactly! You can check here!

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

Hint. I wasn't claiming that Trump is ahead in the polls.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Oh, I thought the 2000 election fiasco was caused by hanging chads. Guess I've been wrong all these years.

Do you think mail-in ballots have hanging chads?

 

[Tippaporn]

11 hours ago, shdmn said:

Yes, nothing to see here.  Just locker room data leaks of every voter in Michigan.

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2020/09/01/russian-hackers-leak-personal-data-of-nearly-every-voter-in-michigan-plus-a-million-more-voters-in-four-other-states
 

From your linked article.

 

Alex Stamos, a cybersecurity expert and adjunct professor at Stanford’s Freeman-Spogli Institute, cautions against “jumping at shadows” in response to Kommersant‘s report. “This information is generally public and could have been taken from hundreds of customers of voter information brokers,” he explained on Twitter, adding, “Darkweb forums, especially ones in Russian, are chock full of free and paid data dumps like this with no immediate use.”

 

Yes, nothing to see here.