Trump assails recount push, claims millions voted illegally

[JackThompson]

On 11/28/2016 at 0:20 PM, freebyrd said:

How does an illegal immigrant vote for anyone if they aren't legally registered? And as someone else said, why would they take such a risk? It was the other illegality that Trump was surely referring to (?) that I commented on.

Also @Andaman Al

 

Registering to vote is easy - far too easy.  With state-issued IDs being issued to illegals in many states, and fake ID "packages" available for a cost of between $120 and $300, and NO form of verification of citizenship required when registering to vote in many locales, it would be foolish to think illegal-aliens did not vote. 

 

After all, most illegal aliens are serial-felons.  The documents they use to work (estimated 80% of them) are evidence of felony document-fraud.  Cases have not been prosecuted because Repubs wanted cheap-labor and the Dems wanted the votes.   Thus, the notion of "law abiding illegals" - even if you dismiss the illegal-entry charge - is ludicrous.

 

Now combine those probable votes with the "dead people" who have regularly voted Dem in previous elections - especially in places like Chicago and other population-centers, which are the only places Dems win (anymore).  Even the liberal "Pew Research Center" has documented voting "irregularities" in previous elections, along these lines.

 

A fairly-new source on this was an interview with a former Border Patrol agent, who regularly found voter-registration cards in the possession of illegal-aliens, many of whom admitted they had voted.  He retired before Trump came along, and gave the illegal aliens a huuuuge reason to vote.

 

"I worked in six locations across the United States. I probably arrested more than 1,000 illegal aliens in my career and I routinely encountered people who were in possession of voter registration cards. And as a part of my interview of them when they were arrested, I would ask them, "Do you or have you voted?' and often, I would get the answer 'yes,'" he explained.

 

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/11/30/ice-agent-counterfeit-drivers-licenses-illegal-immigration-voters-registration-elections
 

As to the size of the pool of illegals who may have voted, forget the "official" 8-10 Million figure, based on the illusion that illegal-aliens dutifully fill out government census reports at the same rate as the general population.  Bear Stearns did an analysis in 2005 which estimated the illegal-alien population at 20-Million.  Although immigration from Mexican citizens has slowed, those coming from Central America has greatly increased.  For this reason, some estimate the total is as high as 38 million, now.

 

http://www.steinreport.com/BearStearnsStudy.pdf

http://www.capsweb.org/press-releases/illegal-aliens-estimated-20-38-million

 

But until a full investigation of the voter rolls is done, we will not have "proof" that what Trump believes to be true is verified as fact.  Until this election, there was nary a chance such an investigation would ever occur.  With Jeff Sessions as the next Attorney General, there is a chance that it finally will happen. 

Edited December 5, 2016 by JackThompson
add mention of poster with similar point

[JackThompson]

23 hours ago, iReason said:

Although, the people had spoken.

More that 2.5 million of them more than the huckster. 

 

You can't spin it.

 

Spin is irrelevant, here.  The race for the presidency was not to obtain the most votes nationwide, it was to win the electoral votes allocated by state.  You are, essentially, saying Trump lost a race which never existed, and in which he never attempted to compete.  The winner in a game of chess is not determined by who has more pieces on the board.

 

Campaign tactics would be completely different if the race were for the popular vote - the middle of the country would be ignored, and presidential candidates would spend all their time in large population-centers.  This is precisely the argument against changing to a popular vote election for president.  The president is supposed to represent the broad-base of the country - not just a few large cities and urban areas.

[mesquite]

 
Spin is irrelevant, here.  The race for the presidency was not to obtain the most votes nationwide, it was to win the electoral votes allocated by state.  You are, essentially, saying Trump lost a race which never existed, and in which he never attempted to compete.  The winner in a game of chess is not determined by who has more pieces on the board.
 
Campaign tactics would be completely different if the race were for the popular vote - the middle of the country would be ignored, and presidential candidates would spend all their time in large population-centers.  This is precisely the argument against changing to a popular vote election for president.  The president is supposed to represent the broad-base of the country - not just a few large cities and urban areas.

Well put.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect