You know who you are.


Washington State Shooter, A Non-U.S. Citizen, Voted in Three Elections

9/29/16

Arcen Cetin, the Turkish 20-year-old who is accused of murdering five strangers at a mall in Washington state last weekend, is not a U.S. citizen. But that doesn't mean he hasn't been voting in U.S. elections. KING 5, a Seattle television station, has the story: (Video at the link)

Federal sources confirm to KING 5 that Cetin was not a U.S. citizen, meaning legally he cannot vote. However, state records show Cetin registered to vote in 2014 and participated in three election cycles, including the May presidential primary.

Cetin, who immigrated to the United States from Turkey as a child, is considered a permanent resident or green card holder. While a permanent resident can apply for U.S. citizenship after a certain period of time, sources tell KING his status had not changed from green card holder to U.S. citizen.

While voters must attest to citizenship upon registering online or registering to vote at the Department of Licensing Office, Washington state doesn't require proof of citizenship. Therefore elections officials say the state's elections system operates, more or less, under an honor system.
​

Meanwhile—despite the incessant drumbeat telling us there has never in the history of the Republic been a case of voter fraud—research published in Electoral Studies has found that non-citizens vote in significant enough numbers to actually sway elections. Yet liberal groups oppose states requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Their argument is that it's better to err on the side of enfranchising more people. These laws "[exclude] legitimate voters who do not have documentary proof of citizenship," they say. But at what cost?

Hillary Clinton, for her part, recently suggested that there is a "right" to immigrate to the United States—a remarkably radical position that no other U.S. president has ever held. (And perhaps needless to say, no other country in the world—save, perhaps, Angela Merkel's Germany—takes the view that the world has a "right" to immigrate to their shores.) Do Clinton and her allies also believe foreigners have a "right" to vote in U.S. elections?

 

Let's just send out ballots to everyone on earth. Let them decide who'll be our next president.

 

Hum, I don't think anyone has denied that it happens, but data shows that it is statistically a low number. But I do think it's funny that there are republicans who have been catch red handed trying their hand at vote fraud only to be stopped cold. Seems that while the system has flaws, it does work in most cases.

 

Well, whatever you do, don't offer up one single instance to backup your claim.

Here's some more "funny" for ya.


Former Charlotte Mayor Patrick Cannon pleads guilty to misdemeanor in voting fraud case

3/16/16

A 500-mile drive for a 10-minute hearing and a guilty plea may have brought former Charlotte Mayor Patrick Cannon one step closer to his freedom.

On Wednesday, Cannon returned to his hometown for the first time since his imprisonment 16 months ago. For the fifth time in the last two years, the 49-year-old Democrat stood before a judge, this time to say he was guilty of attempted voter fraud when he cast a ballot in the November 2014 election.



Bridgeport State Rep. Christina Ayala arrested on 19 voting fraud charges

9/26/14

HARTFORD >> State Rep. Christina “Tita” Ayala, D-Bridgeport, was arrested Friday on 19 voting fraud charges.

Ayala, 31, is accused of voting in local and state elections in districts she did not live, the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office said in a press release.

The arrest warrant affidavit also alleges Ayala provided fabricated evidence to state Election Enforcement Commission investigators that showed she lived at an address in a district where she voted while actually living outside the district, according to the release.



State launches fraud investigation into voter registration group

9/9/14


ATLANTA - Channel 2 Action News has learned Georgia's secretary of state is investigating allegations of forged voter registration applications and demanding records from a voter registration group with ties to one of the state's highest ranking Democrats.

A subpoena was sent to the New Georgia Project and its parent organization Third Sector Development on Tuesday.

The organization is a project of the nonprofit organization Third Sector Development, which was founded and is led by House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams.



Politician Whose Son Is Landrieu’s Chief-Of-Staff Urges Voters To ‘Vote Twice’

12/1/14

Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s chief-of-staff was present at an event held a day before the midterm election in which his father, a Louisiana mayor, urged people to vote twice in order to re-elect Landrieu.

The Black Conservatives Fund published video of the event, recorded on Nov. 3, showing Opelousas mayor Don Cravins Sr. telling a crowd that if they had already cast an early voting ballot in the election that they should vote again.

“If you early voted, go vote again tomorrow,” Cravins Sr. told the crowd which was gathered at the Charcoal Lounge.

Cravins Sr. is a former state senator and Democratic Party operative. He is currently facing a run-off against another Democrat.

 

Hillary still hasnt ever been president. So no person who has ever been president has ever said immigration is a right. However, considering the policies and actions of Obama and the liberals in general, it appears they do in fact say so without actually coming out and saying so.

 

I am quite positive that a man who can find these democrats that are having issues will be very well suited to substitute the word "republican" in his search.

I don't need to find any proof because I know it has happened, and there is nothing that I need to prove to you. You can take what I say however you wish. Your opinion of me makes me laugh.

 

M4M, I've told this kid time and time again, he is certainly no match for you. Far from it. Yet he continues to come back for more time and time again. I guess he really is a glutton for punishment. Will they ever learn?

 

Prove me wrong and show that there was never a single case of a Republican being convicted of voter fraud.

 

Hey Smithy, do you love this? "I don't need to prove nuthin' to you!"

Then just minutes later... "You need to prove me wrong."

Don't waste you r time, Smithy, with Mr. "I don't have to prove nothing...but yoiu do."

 

You guys keep saying that I am wrong or something, so why not prove it once and for all... There are plenty of cases of Republicans being convicted of voter fraud... Just ask Scott Walker and Robert Monroe...

Go ahead and pretend to talk behind my back, as if it matters... You know you're wrong. Both of you.

 

I have mentioned this before but it has relevance here too I think.

I built a gas plant in a small Alberta town some years ago and my entire crew had to take up temporary residence there and I never asked my employees which way to vote but that they all get out and vote at least to show that we a small part of the community that we were staying with during the build.

At the polling stations we had to make declarations that we were permanent residents of the town in order to be eligible to vote.

I thought that since he had won the previous 3 elections unopposed and finally someone came forward to oppose him with a platform that I liked and thought would be good for the town in the big picture I would back her.

Our votes unseated the incumbent Mayor who thought he was unbeatable and I showed him that he wasn't ...

As far as influencing my employees votes ... "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink"

 

Voter fraud is covered up by those who benefit from it.

 

Republicans And Voter Fraud
JULY 30, 2015 BY REPUBLICANVIEWS.ORG

Overall, voter fraud is quite rare. Between the years of 2000 and 2012, there were only 867 proven cases of voter fraud in the United States. In fact, some studies have found this number to be even lower, depending on the definition of credible voter fraud. One study, which tracked all accusations of voter fraud across the country from 2000 to 2014, determined only 31 of them, out of one billion ballots cast, to be credible voter fraud. Throughout history, both parties have been found guilty of this crime. However, in the years since 2012, the Republican Party has been far more prevalent in the news regarding this matter than the Democratic Party. Case after case of voter fraud has been brought to light, and it seems that just about every one involves Republicans.

The party’s platform stands firm on a no tolerance policy regarding voter fraud, and have been making visible efforts to crack down hard on violators. The 2012 Republican Party platform states, “Honest elections are the foundation of representative government. We support State efforts to ensure ballot access for the elderly, the handicapped, military personnel, and all authorized voters. For the same reason, we applaud legislation to require photo identification for voting and to prevent election fraud, particularly with regard to registration and absentee ballots. We support State laws that require proof of citizenship at the time of voter registration to protect our electoral system against a significant and growing form of voter fraud. Every time that a fraudulent vote is cast, it effectively cancels out a vote of a legitimate voter.” Considering voter fraud is so uncommon overall, this makes it far more likely that the fraud is reserved to a few pockets of the party rather than to Republicans as a whole, as much of the media proposes.” The party platform goes on to describe voter fraud as “political poison,” explaining that “ It strikes at the heart of representative government. We call on every citizen, elected official, and member of the judiciary to preserve the integrity of the vote. We call for vigorous prosecution of voter fraud at the State and federal level.”


Republican Reactions To Voter Fraud
Many Republican candidates and figures are speaking out against this phenomena that is being being attributed to their party. Others see the rampant accusation as over-exaggeration. Senator Rand Paul, for example, believes that much of the concern regarding voter fraud is due to the hype it has received from the media. “There is still some fraud, and so we should stop that,” Paul told former Obama adviser David Axelrod during a sit-down. When Axelrod stated his view that instances of fraud were probably pretty rare, Paul continued, “It probably is, and I think Republicans may have over-emphasized this.” He then went on to explain that he does indeed support voter ID requirements, but believes that making them too strict could be a hinderance to voters.

Many believe that voting fraud is being emphasized in order to justify the creation of stronger voter ID laws, despite the fact that statistics show voter fraud to be so infrequent as to be inconsequential to elections. Others argue the opposite – that the Republican push for stricter voter ID laws is to show their devotion to the cause of stopping voter fraud in a time where the media is rife with Republicans committing said fraud. The attempt to strengthen voter ID laws included a push to decrease early voting in many states, including the key swing states of North Carolina, Ohio and Wisconsin. On this subject, Paul commented, “I don’t think early voting is biased one way or the other. So I think eliminating it is a mistake for the—Republicans who want to make their whole thing eliminating early voting, I think that’s a mistake.”

Voter ID Law Controversy
While Republicans believe that the answer to voter fraud is to strengthen voter ID laws, others argue that doing so could actually harm the election process. In 2014, when the Supreme Court reviewed a tightening of voter ID laws in Texas, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued, “The greatest threat to public confidence in elections in this case is the prospect of enforcing a purposefully discriminatory law, one that likely imposes an unconstitutional poll tax and risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters.” Others believe that this may be a good thing. The National Review’s Kevin D. Williamson responded to the concern that stricter laws would bring fewer voters by stating, “If we end up with fewer voters, we may yet end up with better elections.” Another conservative writer in favor of stricter voter ID laws explained why the Democratic attachment to widespread voting is problematic by stating, “The Constitution did not create a direct democracy; it established a constitutional republic. Its goal was to preserve liberty, not to maximize popular sovereignty.” Yet another writer has stated, “The more of these people who are pressured into registering and voting, the greater our party will suffer.” This is the exact reason that Republicans have staunchly resolved to fight against voter fraud.

One particularly notable debate on the topic of voter fraud took place between Hillary Clinton and Chris Christie. Clinton, like the majority of her party, believes in the expansion of voter rights. During a speech at at Texas Southern University in June of 2015, Clinton accused Republicans of “deliberately trying to stop” young people and minorities from voting due to their push for stricter voter laws in Texas. “What is happening is a sweeping effort to disempower and disenfranchise people of color, poor people and young people from one end of our country to the other,” she said. Christie, however, was just as outraged at Clinton’s proposals at she was at his. When faced with Clinton’s push for universal voter registration at the age of 18, Christie stated, “She doesn’t know what she’s talking about. You know, in New Jersey, we have early voting that [is] available to people. I don’t want to expand it and increase the opportunities for fraud. Maybe that’s what Mrs. Clinton wants to do. I don’t know.”

The GOP ACORN Scandal
In November of 2012, Strategic Allied Consulting, the Republican Party of Florida’s top recipient of 2012 expenditures, was discovered to have turned in over 100 apparently fraudulent voter registration forms to the Palm Beach County, FL Supervisor of Elections. The fraud appears to have been run by Nathan Sproul. Sproul is a notorious Republican operative often hired for Republican Presidential campaigns. He has also been accused of numerous other cases of voter fraud in the form of shredding Democratic voter registration forms in multiple states. The firm was paid $667,000 by the Flordia GOP to run voter registration campaigns. However, they also received another, identical payment for unidentified purposes. Strategic Allied Consulting had also handled voter registration campaigns in North Carolina, Virginia and Colorado in the same year. Furthermore, the firm was tied to Mitt Romney’s campaign and Romney hired Sproul as a political consultant in late 2011 despite his long history of fraud accusations. This fraud was deemed the GOP ACORN Scandal after the now-disbanded ACORN, which was accused by the GOP of falsifying voter registration forms in 2008.

The GOP immediately fired Strategic Allied Consulting when this information came to light, with RNC spokesman Sean Spicer stating, “This is an issue we take extremely seriously. When allegations were brought to our attention we severed all ties to the firm.” The party also filed complaints against the company with the Florida Secretary of State’s office. Sproul stated that one employee was responsible for the falsifications within the firm. When the information was publicized Brad Friedman, who runs the electoral watchdog Brad Blog tied it to other Republican voter frauds in California and Colorado at that time, stating “A massive GOP voter registration scheme, which appears to involve the upper-echelons of the national party, [has begun] to emerge.” Former Representative Chris Cannon of Utah compared the 2, and even seemed to place Strategic Allied Consulting below ACORN, stating “the difference between ACORN and Sproul is that ACORN doesn’t throw away or change registration documents after they have been filled out.”

Investigations of this case were inconclusive as to whether the falsified forms would have led to actual voter fraud, or if they were simply attempts of employees to cover up not having met a quota or goal. Many of the forms were lacking social security numbers, had false house numbers, and dates of birth that did not match the names. These are issues that would have been easily caught and would not have gotten through security on polling day, which led to the speculation that the overall goal of these falsifications may not have been eventual voter fraud.

Sources:

• Voter Fraud Is Rare – and in This Cycle, It’s All Been Committed by Republicans – AlterNet
• Potential voter registration fraud in Florida: GOP’s own ‘ACORN’ scandal? – The Christian Science Monitor
• Republican Party on Government Reform – On The Issues
• Rand Paul calls out GOP over voter fraud claims – MSNBC
• They Just Don’t Like Voting – U.S. News
• Chris Christie Wonders Whether Hillary Clinton Wants To ‘Increase The Opportunities’ For Voter Fraud – The Huffington Post

http://www.republicanviews.org/republicans-and-voter-fraud/

Who'd'a thunk it?

 

The voter fruad is in the idea that you people think your vote counts. It doesnt. Never did. The joke is on you.

 

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/provisions.html

Presidential Election Laws

Provisions of the Constitution
United States Code
2012 Presidential Election Pamphlet
THE CONSTITUTION
Article II

Section 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

Twelfth Amendment

The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate; The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;--The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.... The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President to the United States.

Fourteenth Amendment

Section 3. No person shall be... elector of President and Vice President ... who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Fifteenth Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

Nineteenth Amendment

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Twentieth Amendment

Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.

Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.

Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.

Section 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

Twenty-Second Amendment

Section 1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President when this Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

Twenty-Third Amendment

Section 1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct:
A number of electors of President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

Twenty-Fourth Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Twenty-Fifth Amendment

Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

Section 3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

Section 4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. There upon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

Twenty-Sixth Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

 

Was There Election Fraud in Arizona? 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know

3/26/16

Bernie Sanders supporters are questioning the results of the Arizona primary, after rumors of potential election fraud started circulating. Reduced numbers of polling stations in Maricopa County resulted in long lines that may have prevented some people from being able to vote. In addition, there were concerns that some Democrats were reclassified as Republicans or Independents, forcing them to vote provisionally or not have their vote count at all. Bernie Sanders addressed the issue in a press conference on Wednesday, calling the long lines and 5-hour waits a “disgrace.” Meanwhile, the mayor of Phoenix has requested an investigation and a public hearing about the primary will be held on Monday. Similar problems are now being reported in New York. (Read about it here.) Was there election fraud in Arizona? After you read the story, answer our poll at the very end of the article and let us know what you think.

Here’s what you need to know.

1. The Arizona Governor Said Long Lines that Forced Some to Wait Five Hours to Vote Were ‘Unacceptable’

The results in the Arizona election were close. According to AZCentral, Hillary Clinton got 57.63 percent of the vote and a total of 41 delegates, while Sanders got 39.94 percent of the vote and a total of 26 delegates.
Greg Stanton, Mayor of Phoenix, requested a federal investigation into misconduct allegations. He wrote a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, which you can read here.

2. Hundreds of Voters Were Still Standing in Line When the Associated Press Projected Clinton as the Winner
10:15pm, still 300+ voters in line at dtphx poll spot. Last voter I saw get in line at 7pm still there. #AZPrimary pic.twitter.com/zicGFiofOb

— Ricardo Cano (@Ricard ......) March 23, 2016

A big cause for concern were the incredibly long lines at some polling stations, with some voters forced to wait five hours before they could vote. This was mainly a problem in Maricopa County, where county officials had decided to save money by cutting down on the number of polling stations for the primary, not anticipating the huge voter turnout. In the 2012 presidential primary, Maricopa County had 200-plus polling locations. Yesterday, they only had 60. This tweet puts the situation into perspective:

According to AZCentral, hundreds of voters were still in line waiting to vote in Maricopa County when the Associated Press projected that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were going to win. At one polling site, the Church of the Nazarene, there were more than 600 voters in line when polls closed at 7 p.m. In downtown Phoenix, voters were still waiting in line at midnight.

3. Voters Who Were Registered Democrat in the Past Were Not Able to Vote in the Arizona Primary

In Arizona, unless you are registered with the Democratic, Green, or Republican party, you can’t vote in the presidential primary. Arizona is also a closed primary, which means you can only vote for the party in which you’re registered. Many people who had voted Democrat in past elections reported that when they showed up to vote, their names were not on the list of registered Democratic voters. Others reported that they had been reclassified as Independent or Republican. Unfortunately, anyone who votes provisionally and isn’t registered with the Democratic, Green, or Republican party won’t have their vote counted at all:

taddevine ninaturner ErikaAndiola BernieSanders JoyAnnReid 1,000s denied Democracy! #AZPrimary #AZElectionFraud pic.twitter.com/lkURz5RZFr

— OnsightIT (@....... ) March 23, 2016

On Reddit, multiple people shared stories of encountering problems when they tried to vote. Redditor st_gulik said that he was a long-time registered Democrat who had voted in November 2015 and was still registered when he checked on February 15. When he arrived to vote, he was told he wasn’t registered. He shared this photo of what came up when his name was searched at the polling booth. He was given a provisional ballot:


On Reddit, another Arizona voter shared, “Almost every person I know that is a Sanders supporter was given a provisional ballot, including myself. I’m not a sore loser, I’m just pissed that my state is either inept or intentionally doing this. I’m pissed that my vote won’t count.” The poster later added that they were told they had to do a provisional ballot because they didn’t use early voter ballots sent to them. However, they didn’t request early voting or ever receive the ballots.

A voter in Pima County experienced the same issue. A technical error in the computer system took away her Democrat status and she was given a provisional ballot:

A long list of stories about people who couldn’t vote in Arizona can be found on this thread on Reddit. Stories include one commenter whose brother registered Democrat two days before the deadline and received an email verification that he was registered as Democrat. But when he got to the poll, he was told he had no registered affiliation and had to vote provisional. Another commenter said their father was registered Democrat, waited in line for three hours despite having a heart condition, and was turned away.

One of the more disturbing stories came from a Redditor whose fiancee couldn’t vote. (You can read the story here.) They both registered Democrat on the same day and got their voter identification cards on the same day. They showed up to vote in Maricopa County with all the paperwork they needed. He was able to vote but his fiancee was refused a real ballot and told she was Independent. As she dropped in her provisional ballot, one person working at the polling station said, “We’ll see if this is even counted.” They finally got hold of the Secretary of State and were told that she was, indeed, registered as a Democrat the whole time.

So far, most of the complaints are coming from people who wanted to vote for Bernie Sanders. They are alleging that if this wasn’t a technical problem or a glitch, perhaps a demographic was targeted or people on a donation list were targeted.

4. While Voters Protested and Petitioned, Sanders Said the Problems Were a ‘Disgrace’



5. If You Experienced Problems Voting in Arizona, Here’s Who You Should Contact

Line to vote in #dtphx poll place literally wraps around the block. 30 min. till polls technically close @ azcentral pic.twitter.com/82rcNi6E6J

— Ricardo Cano (@Rica..... ) March 23, 2016

------------------


Massive Clinton voter fraud in NY

4/19/16

As New York prepares for its most meaningful presidential primary in decades, some of the candidates’ most passionate supporters are finding out they will be spending Election Day on the sidelines.

According to a recent emergency lawsuit filed in a Long Island federal court, there have been “reports of thousands of NY voters being erroneously purged from the rolls.”

Many of these purged voters seem to be Bernie Sanders supporters, leading to fresh questions about whether Hillary Clinton’s campaign is trying to steal the New York primary.

Under state laws, only registered Democrats can vote in today’s Democratic primary. That has led thousands of Sanders supporters in recent months to register as Democrats so they could vote.

Now, many of those voters are learning that their registrations have been misfiled or have inexplicably gone missing. This is eerily similar to what happened in at least one other state where Clinton ended up eking out a victory.

“We were seeing an alarming number of voter affiliations changed without people’s knowledge or consent, people who were registered listed as not registered,” Shyla Nelson, a spokeswoman for Election Justice USA, said. According to a report from The Gothamist:

“One plaintiff, a 24-year-old from Suffolk County, says that he registered as a Democrat in 2009, and that a change of affiliation form the BOE showed him, supposedly proving he left the party, bears a signature that is an “identical, pixel-by-pixel” copy of the signature on his driver’s license. Another plaintiff, a 58-year-old from upstate Onondaga County, had been registered as a Democrat since 1989, but on April 11th found that her registration was “purged.” An employee of the county told her that the change was a clerical error, but that she would not be able to vote on Tuesday, according to the suit. Others named in the lawsuit registered for the first time within days of the new voter deadline in March, or the party-change deadline last October.”​

Critics of Clinton were quick to point out that her campaign has been accused of similar dirty tricks in the recent past.

Following the Arizona primary, more than 210,000 have signed a White House petition asking for a federal investigation after “voters showed up to the polls only to find that they were listed as independents, Republicans, or had no party affiliation at all.”

Similar instances seem to be occurring in New York. For example, in Brooklyn — birthplace of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders — “state voter enrollment statistics found that the number of active registered Democrats dropped there by 63,558 voters between November 2015 and April 2016,” according to local public radio station WNYC.

-------------


Did the Democratic Party Commit Election Fraud in Puerto Rico?

6/6/16

Days before Hillary Clinton won the primary in Puerto Rico, the party reduced polling locations from 1,510 to 432.

Heavy reported Sunday:

In a decision that is disturbingly reminiscent of problems seen in Arizona, polling locations in Puerto Rico were reduced from 1,510 to 432. On May 5, the Democratic Party announced there would be 1,510 polling places, according to Caribbean Business. The drastically reduced number was announced on May 27, with the remaining locations being open only for local voting and not the presidential primary. You can read a discussion about the whole thing on this Reddit thread.

In contrast, according to a press release by Grassroots for Bernie volunteers, the 2008 Democratic primary in Puerto Rico had 2,306 polling places serving 384,758 voters. There will only be 432 for the 2016 primary.

This is especially a problem because polling hours are only from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. local time. This could lead to long lines or some voters even being turned away, like they were in Arizona. This ended up happening. Some locations reported long lines and even some people passing out from standing in line in the heat for so long.

In Arizona, similar drastic reductions became such a huge issue that people ended up waiting in line for hours and hours just to vote, with some not able to vote until late into the night. …

The decrease in polling stations could turn a primary that was expected to have 600,000 voters participating into one with just 300,000 voters, Caribbean Business reported. On Reddit, one person suggested the problem was that they didn’t have enough poll workers and ballots have to be counted manually. However, this doesn’t make much sense, considering that in 2008 they were able to handle 2,306 polling places.

Caribbean Business reported that Bernie Sanders’ campaign team accused the leadership of the local Democratic Party of fraud, “saying they hindered the certification process of their voting center officials,” according to the news site.

The Hispanic vote director for the campaign of the Vermont senator, Betsy Franceschini, denounced a series of irregularities her work team faced Friday while thousands of inmates at the island’s correctional facilities were voting.

“Our Bernie Sanders officials were never certified. We had 40 officials we submitted in time for the prisons. Not one of them was certified, while all of theirs [Hillary Clinton’s] went in. Attorney Manny Suárez had to go in order for us to be let in. This is a great fraud,” Franceschini said in a phone interview with Caribbean Business.
...
Regarding the fact that the leadership of the Democratic Party in Puerto Rico – which has expressed itself publicly in favor of the candidacy of former first lady Hillary Clinton – has faced problems in the recruitment process of officials for voting centers, which would put the process’ transparency at risk, Prats denied there was any inconvenience that would prevent holding the primary.

Without mentioning participation estimates, Prats said he foresees the event “will be an example of wide electoral participation.” In previous interviews with the president of the local Democratic Party, he has mentioned that more than 600,000 voters would participate in these primaries.

However the local committeeman of the party, Kenneth McClintock, said that due to the decrease in the number of centers made available – from 1,510 to 432 – participation could be around 300,000 voters.
----------------


Hillary Clinton campaign accused of voter fraud in Polk County, Iowa Caucus

2/2/16

IOWA - Bernie Sanders supporters are outraged claiming caucus chair Drew Gentsch and precinct captain Liz Buck did not conduct an actual count of Clinton supporters. The pair are accused of deliberately misleading the caucus at precinct #43 in Des Moines.

This is a very serious accusation especially given the razor thin race in Iowa between Clinton and Sanders. The entire incident was captured on camera by C-SPAN. We have included the full video below.

Reddit user cosmicjesus3 explains:

So basically in the caucus they have to hand count everyone depending on what side they're sitting on. Well when it came time to do the second count the numbers were off. The first vote breakdown was like this
FIRST VOTE: 215 Sanders 210 Clinton 26 O'Malley 8 Undecided 459 TOTAL
And this is the SECOND Vote: 232 Clinton 224 Sanders 456 Total
So somehow they lost 3 people but Clinton's vote went up by 14.
So basically what had happened was Hillary's team didn't take the time to do a full recount instead she just added the new people who joined the second vote. Which clearly wasn't an accurate count.

youtu.be/CNz-dtnQ1Ys
----------


Voters supporting Bernie Sanders are claiming another case of election fraud occurred in Iowa at Ames District 1-3

2/2/16

IOWA - Right on the heels of claims that election fraud occurred at Iowa precinct #43 we have another story that is also worth investigating. In the latest accusation voters from Ames District 1-3 are claiming "the organizer there was attempting to lie to voters and stall in a manner that clearly benefited Hillary Clinton".

Both of these stories are very serious accusations especially since the race between Clinton and Sanders is extremely close. The entire incident was captured on camera . We have included the full video below.

Reddit user DBZ5episodesyelling explains:

The hall was full to the point where fire regulations were in question. So he announces that we are going to caucus outside. an hour goes by and we're still sitting.
At this point he announces that everyone who is sure of their vote is going to file out the door and tell it to an organizer and then go home. Both the bernie and clinton organizers claim this is incorrect. 45 minutes go by.
At this point many people, most first time caucus goers, were leaving. The man still refused to start counting votes. He claimed everyone could film him if they wished.
I think you all can guess what happens next. People start filming him. Not only does he refuse to go on record, not only does he refuse to state his name, but he attempted to get the (multiple) people filming kicked out because they were "independents".
Finally a pregnant caucus-goer takes control of the entire situation. The result: 16.1% clinton 84% sanders. If the caucus had been at the correct time, I'm confident it would have been a no-contest sanders victory.
Is there anyone else caucusing in Iowa? Did you experience something similar?

youtu.be/dN89WcdCaHQ
------------


VIDEO: Voter Fraud In Nevada Caught On Video?

2/20/16

NEVADA - A video has surfaced on Youtube showing what appears to be voter fraud. In the video you can see Hillary Clinton voters bypassing the designated voting registration area to cast ballots in the Nevada caucus. What do you think?

Story developing, if you have more information to add please leave a comment. Past incidents of the Hillary Clinton campaign playing dirty can be seen here and here.



-------------


Clinton Campaign Lawyer Linked to DEAD PEOPLE VOTING SCAM

11/1/15


A lawyer named Marc Elias who has strong ties to the Clintons and Hillary’s presidential campaign is being
investigated for voter fraud. His previous work includes fighting voter IDs.

Jazz Shaw reports at Hot Air:

Clinton campaign attorney represented voting group now charged with registering dead people

Marc is currently the general counsel for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, but he’s had plenty of other assignments for the Democrats before this. It seems as if Marc’s specialty is dealing with pesky cases involving voter registration and election fraud. One of the latest examples on his resume dealt with a voter registration group in the Buckeye State who he represented earlier this year known as the Ohio Organizing Collaborative. They were challenging the state’s new voter ID law, though their usual purpose was supposed to be going out and registering voters of all stripes to increase citizen participation in the electoral process.​

Here’s more from the Washington Free Beacon:

Top Clinton Lawyer Filed Voter Suppression Suit for Group Now Under Investigation for Voter Fraud

A group that had been represented by the top lawyer for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign earlier this year is now being investigated by Ohio authorities for fraudulent voter registrations, including the registration of deceased individuals.

Marc Elias, an attorney at Perkins Coie who has become the go-to fixer for Democrats and is now general counsel for Clinton’s presidential campaign, became involved with the Ohio Organizing Collaborative this May when he filed a lawsuit on its behalf to challenge the state’s voter identification laws.

Now the group is being investigated by the Ohio Bureau of Criminal investigation after a local board of elections alleged that 25 to 30 of the voter-registration applications that the group submitted appeared to be fraudulent.​

Anyone surprised?
------------------------


Voter Suppression in California: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know


5/28/16

After hundreds of thousands of voters (and even more) have reported problems with their voter registrations in states across the country, problems are popping up again before the last set of primaries for the presidential election. This time, the problems are in California, and are reported frequently among Bernie Sanders supporters. Voters are reporting issues with their registrations being dropped, their party being changed, or receiving the wrong ballot that doesn’t let them vote for president in the primary. On top of all of that, mainstream media has admitted to planning to call the nomination for Hillary Clinton hours before the polls in California even close. What’s happening? Is this voter suppression, election fraud, or a set of very unfortunate technical glitches?

Here’s what you need to know, and what you can do if you encounter a problem:

1. Voters Are Reporting Their Registrations Changed or Receiving the Wrong Ballots

2. A Lawsuit Has Been Filed Seeking to Extend Voter Registration
A lawsuit has been filed seeking to extend voter registration all the way to the June 7 primary itself, due to confusion about registration issues. The suit seeks injunctive relief that also includes allowing unaffiliated voters who mailed in the wrong ballot or couldn’t vote for presidential primary candidates to “revote.”

3. TV Media Admitted to Already Planning to Call the Election for Clinton Hours Before the Polls Close


Multiple TV networks have admitted that at 8:00 p.m. Eastern on June 7, three hours before polls in California even close, they’re going to report that Hillary Clinton has won the Democratic nomination. This is noted in the video above on MSNBC. This could suppress the vote, as voters who have no idea what’s actually happening might be discouraged from voting at all in the last few hours of the election.

4. Non-Partisan Voters Are Receiving No-Party-Preference Ballots that Don’t Let Them Vote in the Presidential Primary
In California, the primary is semi-closed, meaning that voters who aren’t registered with a party still have the option of voting in the Democratic primary. But according to Election Justice USA, 75 percent of non-partisan voters who requested a mail-in ballot received a “No-Party Preference” ballot. These ballots don’t let them vote in the presidential primary.

Adding to the problem is that many non-partisan voters who get this “no-party preference” ballot don’t realize this is the wrong ballot for voting in the Democratic primary. They might mail their ballot in, thinking they can still show up on June 7 and vote in the Democratic presidential primary. According to a poll worker, those people will be told that they already voted and can’t vote again.

5. Voter Registration Issues Have Been Reported All Over the Country, Including Arizona, New York, and More
California isn’t the first state where voters have reported that their registration status has mysteriously changed. In New York, one voter reported that her signature appeared to be forged on a voter registration sheet. Hundreds of thousands of voters in Brooklyn were mysteriously dropped from the rolls. Election Justice USA filed a lawsuit in New York, and other lawsuits have been filed in other states. You can read about problems in New York here and about problems in Arizona here.
---------------------


Racketeering Lawsuit Exposing Nationwide Vote Rigging in DNC Primaries Could Derail Clinton

6/12/16

A major lawsuit is on the precipice of being filed by the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity, the implications of which could dramatically alter the landscape of the 2016 U.S. presidential race.

The group claims that in about eleven states, there has been noted a significant difference between the exit polls and the electronic vote totals presented on the morning after the primaries. These differences show votes appear to be shifted from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton. The chances of this kind of shift happening are considered to be statistically impossible between Tuesday night and Wednesday morning in these eleven states. See the chart below.

“We are going to be filing a racketeering lawsuit under the Ohio Racketeering law, the strongest in the country and we can bring in every state, our RICO statute is coextensive with the federal RICO statute… So they’re nailed,” said Cliff Arnebeck.

Computer security expert Stephen Spoonamore, who worked with Arnebeck noted that when exit poll data varies more than 2% from electronic vote totals, the electronic vote totals are questionable.

In fact, 2% is the boundary by the US government when determining whether an election in another country has possibly been stolen. Please notice the exit poll differences in the 2016 DNC primaries listed above are significantly more than 2%. These differences point to questionable results for the electronic vote totals and likely electronic vote switching.

“This is not a Republican-Democrat issue, this is not a partisan issue, this is a Democracy issue, if you actually care about a Constitutional democracy in which each person votes, that vote is validated and the people who end up in office are reflected on the basis of the way people voted you care about this issue,” said Spoonamore.

According to the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity:

Initially, the new lawsuit was to be filed on June 6, as stated in the video release announcing the results of their investigation, but the filing was delayed due to ADE wanting to include data from California’s primary, which was held on June 7.

Suspiciously, the Media Consortium and Edison Research, which control election polling, has now decided to cancel the remaining exit polls for the 2016 primaries. Many suspect these exit polls have been canceled because these exit poll differences could be used as an indicator of election fraud when contrasted with electronic voting totals.

“There is no way the Democratic Convention is going to nominate somebody on the basis of obviously stolen votes…the facts are coming out and that’s a fact…We are suing the media as being complicit in the crime. They are acting as accessories after the fact. They are covering up evidence of criminal activity, it’s a crime,” said Arnebeck.
-----------------------------------


Election Fraud Report Recommends Decertifying Primary Results for Hillary, Hand Counts of Ballots

9/2/16

A report by the nonprofit election integrity organization Election Justice USA (EJUSA) is recommending that Democratic primary results in numerous states, including New York and California, be decertified and that the paper ballots be counted by hand in all states which show irregularities, where paper ballots are available.

The report, “Democracy Lost: A Report on the Fatally Flawed 2016 Democratic Primaries,” questions the legitimacy of the nomination of Hillary Clinton. It is co-authored by the 100th president of the American Statistical Association, Fritz Scheuren, a professor at George Washington University. The report declares:

“We conclude by calling for decertification of the 2016 Democratic primary results in every state in which we have established a reasonable doubt as to the accuracy of the vote tally.”​

The states in which EJUSA found strong and compelling evidence of election fraud against Bernie Sanders are Alabama, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, South Carolina, and Tennessee.

As a remedy for future elections, the report calls for the “exclusive use of hand-counted paper ballots in all future US elections.”

The report calls attention to a famous scene the HBO documentary “Hacking Democracy,” in which the ease with which a vote-counting machine can be“hacked” is demonstrated. The machine employs a kind of ballot-scanning technology which is currently in use in most states. A malicious program is inserted in the machine, with or without the knowledge of local election officials, which miscounts the votes on the ballots inserted into the machine. Most voting jurisdictions in the US now use such “optical scan” vote tabulating machines.

Following the release the EJUSA report, the mainstream media have attempted to dispel the notion that election fraud could happen in the United States.

In a piece mocking Donald Trump’s recently expressed fears that the general election will be “rigged” for Clinton, Brendan Nyhan of the New York Times writes in “How Donald Trump’s ‘Rigged’ Claim Chips Away at Democracy”:

Nyhan even goes so far as to charge that it is Trump who threatens democracy by challenging the integrity of elections, rather than the perpetrators of possible fraud.

And the Washington Post, in an article published on August 15th, two weeks after the release of the EJUSA report, seems intent on preemptively discounting any future allegations of election fraud. The title of the Post article is “Why plenty of Donald Trump supporters will believe that Hillary Clinton stole the election.”

EJUSA identified voting patterns it said were “strongly suggestive of electronic voting machine tampering.”

The report noted that “in other technologically advanced countries such as Germany, Canada, France, Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Finland, and 53 other countries,” election ballots are counted by hand and in public. Germany banned the use of machines to count ballots in 2009.

The entire Democratic primary season was marked by multiple lawsuits, federal and state level investigations of election fiascos and irregularities, and open instances of fraud benefiting Hillary Clinton, all of it unreported by the national media. In Chicago, a citizens election watchdog group testified at a Chicago Board of Elections hearing that they witnessed local election officials manipulating the results of machine-counted ballots. A lawsuit has been filed by election integrity activists.

Who’s Counting Testifies Before Chicago Elections Board



In San Diego, citizen election observers filmed ballots on which votes for Bernie Sanders appeared to be erased with white-out. A lawsuit alleging election fraud on the part of city officials has also been filed in San Diego County.

Other election integrity groups are also calling for all future elections in the US to be conducted by paper ballots which are hand-counted in full public view, such as the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity.

The recent EJUSA report is one of a number of reports and papers released this year challenging the primary election results which propelled Hillary Clinton to the status of “presumptive nominee.” Another was published by graduate students affiliated with Stanford University entitled
-----------------------


Now, I'm quite sure Hillary didn't generate all these accusations on her own. There had to be a couple, few, maybe more (LOTS and LOTS more) in on it...all pertaining to one candidate during one election season. Yowza!

 

Oh my here we go with that but if it benefits democrats its bad but if it benefits republicans its good for the country bull shit.

 

The real concern one that should frighten all citizens, is the fact that voter fraud is being dismissed by the press and media. When clearly it is rampant in most major cities..

 

In Somerville and Cambridge, MA (sanctuary cities) the parasites stand in line all day and vote repeatedly. No one stops them, no one cares. It is easily done, when you've got a pocket full of identities.

 

Soros is publicly promoting international rigging of the U.S. election, and the media is marching to his drum.