PDA

View Full Version : Trump repeats debunked voter fraud claim at meeting with Hill leaders




CPUd
01-23-2017, 11:46 PM
Trump repeats debunked voter fraud claim at meeting with Hill leaders


In his first meeting with congressional leaders of both parties since taking office, President Donald Trump on Monday reiterated a debunked claim that he lost the national popular vote only because of widespread voter fraud.

Multiple sources described the exchange as part of a generally lighthearted meet-and-greet between Trump and the lawmakers at the White House. It’s unclear whether any of the leaders responded to Trump.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) confirmed that Trump made the voter fraud claim, but added, "I didn't pay a lot of attention to it. I was ready to move onto some policy issues. I didn't anticipate that discussion."

It's further evidence of Trump’s fixation with his narrow victory, in which he won the Electoral College handily despite losing the popular vote to Hillary Clinton by nearly 3 million votes. Nearly three weeks after his Election Day victory, as late California returns drove up Clinton’s popular vote margin, Trump tweeted incorrectly about the size of his victory.

“In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” he wrote.

He’s provided no evidence to back up that claim, and multiple fact checks and investigations have called the assertion false.

Trump's aides did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday evening.

The discussion occurred after Trump and his team spent the weekend fighting with the reporters over the size of Trump's Inauguration Day crowd, citing inaccurate figures to press their case. Press secretary Sean Spicer said Monday that reports describing Trump's comparatively low attendance were part of a "demoralizing" negative media narrative about Trump's presidency.

If leaders of either party were bothered by Trump’s renewed voter fraud claim, it wasn’t clear in their immediate reactions to the meeting.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said “substantive issues” were discussed during the session. He said he laid out Democrats' rationale for slowing down many of Trump’s Cabinet nominations.

"It was a good bipartisan leadership meeting. It was really more like a reception,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). “I enjoyed listening to the president and Sen. Schumer talk about the people they knew in New York. It was pretty lighthearted and a good way to start off.”

One congressional aide who attended the meeting suggested the conversation veered between a discussion of Obamacare, Trump’s Cabinet nominees, infrastructure and relations with China. The aide said Trump teased Schumer, a fellow New Yorker, about their long history.

After the meet-and-greet, Speaker Paul Ryan met one-on-one with Trump. His office said the meeting focused on the legislative agenda this year, including "repealing and replacing Obamacare, undoing harmful regulations, enacting job-creating tax reform, rebuilding our military and securing the border."

After the meeting, Vice President Mike Pence and top aides traveled to the Capitol for further discussions with GOP leadership.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/donald-trump-fraud-claims-234083

Seraphim
01-23-2017, 11:51 PM
In the wikileaks the DNC talks about about voter fraud between candidates and how they are pushing illegal voters for one over the other.

The dems have a near monopoly on voter fraud and have for some time. Was it 3 million? 2 million? 500k? Who knows. But what I do know is that HRC got votes that were illegal. So did Obama and nearly every other Dem in the last 35 years.

UWDude
01-23-2017, 11:52 PM
Who debunked it? Huffington Post or Buzzfeed or CNN?

CPUd
01-23-2017, 11:54 PM
823754023497068549
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/823754023497068549

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-24-2017, 12:34 AM
Voted one star-terrible for a CPUd thread.

dannno
01-24-2017, 12:41 AM
In 2008, there were about 2.8 million votes from illegal immigrants. So it makes sense that in 2016 there were about 3-4 million. Donald Trump totally has the facts behind him on this one.

Then if you add in all the dead people who voted and such, I'm pretty sure you would have 3-4 million illegal votes for Hillary.. I mean, I'm pretty sure most illegals would have voted for Hillary since Trump wanted to deport them.. and dead people always seem to vote Democrat.

CPUd
01-24-2017, 12:42 AM
Without evidence, Trump tells lawmakers 3 million to 5 million illegal ballots cost him the popular vote


Days after being sworn in, President Trump insisted to congressional leaders invited to a reception at the White House that he would have won the popular vote had it not been for millions of illegal votes, according to people familiar with the meeting.

Trump has repeatedly claimed, without evidence, that widespread voter fraud caused him to lose the popular vote to Hillary Clinton, even while he clinched the presidency with an electoral college victory.

Two people familiar with the meeting said Trump spent about 10 minutes at the start of the bipartisan gathering rehashing the campaign. He also told them that between 3 million and 5 million illegal votes caused him to lose the popular vote.

The discussion about Trump's election victory and his claim that he would have won the popular vote was confirmed by a third person familiar with the meeting.

The claim is not supported by any verifiable facts, and analyses of the election found virtually no confirmed cases of voter fraud, let alone millions.

Clinton won the popular vote by more than 2.8 million votes. Trump won 304 electoral college votes to Clinton's 227.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) alluded to Trump's comments as he returned to the Capitol from the meeting Monday night.

“We talked about different electoral college, popular votes, going through the different ones,” McCarthy said. “Well, we talked about going back through past elections. Everyone in there goes through elections and stuff, so everybody's giving their different histories of different parts.”

Asked by reporters after the meeting if Trump made any surprising statements at the gathering, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) replied, “Well, I won’t even go into that.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/23/at-white-house-trump-tells-congressional-leaders-3-5-million-illegal-ballots-cost-him-the-popular-vote/

dannno
01-24-2017, 12:42 AM
Also, why the hell do they use the word "debunked"??

All the media did was ignore the evidence and pretend nothing existed, then they covered their ears and screamed "Lalalalallala!!" and said that he made it up.. But there are studies that back up these claims.

dannno
01-24-2017, 12:45 AM
Trump Is Right — Millions Of Illegals Probably Did Vote In 2016



11/28/2016


Media Bias: Not surprisingly, the media take seriously and support Jill Stein's and Hillary Clinton's excellent vote-recount adventure, despite there being no indication a recount is needed. Heck, even President Obama agrees — Donald Trump won, period. But when Trump dares to suggest in a Sunday tweet that illegal aliens voted in the election, the media respond with massive denial.

"In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally," Trump tweeted to the barely concealed contempt of many in the media.

Typical was the utterly dismissive headline in The Nation, the flagship publication of the progressive movement: "The President-Elect Is An Internet Troll."

The Washington Post's "The Fix" blog site did a little better: "Donald Trump's new explanation for losing the popular vote? A Twitter-born conspiracy theory."

There are many more, too many to put here. Most follow the same theme: Trump foolishly followed the faulty analysis of Gregg Phillips of True The Vote (https://truethevote.org/), an online anti-voter-fraud site and app. Phillips estimates that illegals cast three million votes in the 2016 election. He's wrong, say the media. Heck, even the liberal fact-checking site FactCheck.org says so.

But, in fact, it's almost certain that illegals did vote — and in significant numbers. Whether it was three million or not is another question.

While states control the voter registration process, some states are so notoriously slipshod in their controls (California, Virginia and New York — all of which have political movements to legalize voting by noncitizens — come to mind) that it would be shocking if many illegals didn't vote.

Remember, a low-ball estimate says there are at least 11 million to 12 million illegals in the U.S., but that's based on faulty Census data. More likely estimates put the number at 20 million to 30 million.

What's disappointing is that instead of at least seriously considering Trump's charge, many media reports merely parrot leftist talking points and anti-Trump rhetoric by pushing the idea that Republicans and others not of the progressive left who seek to limit voting to citizens only are racist, xenophobic nuts.

But there is evidence to back Trump's claims. A 2014 study in the online Electoral Studies Journal (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379414000973) shows that in the 2008 and 2010 elections, illegal immigrant votes were in fact quite high.

"We find that some noncitizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and congressional elections," wrote Jesse T. Richman, Gulshan A. Chattha, both of Old Dominion University, and David C. Earnest of George Mason University.

More specifically, they write, "Noncitizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress."

Specifically, the authors say that illegals may have cast as many as 2.8 million votes in 2008 and 2010. That's a lot of votes. And when you consider the population of illegal inhabitants has only grown since then, it's not unreasonable to suppose that their vote has, too.

Critics note that a Harvard team in 2015 had responded to the study (http://projects.iq.harvard.edu/cces/news/perils-cherry-picking-low-frequency-events-large-sample-surveys), calling it "biased." But that report included this gem: "Further, the likely percent of noncitizen voters in recent U.S. elections is 0."

Really? That's simply preposterous, frankly, as anyone who has lived in California can attest. Leftist get-out-the-vote groups openly urge noncitizens to vote during election time, and the registration process is notoriously loose. To suggest there is no illegal voting at all is absurd.

What's appalling, as we said, is not the media's skepticism, but its denial. But why? Illegal votes shouldn't be allowed to sway U.S. elections. So why tolerate them?

When the far left began insinuating that the Russians had hacked the election, the media treated the nonsupported claims with the utmost of respect. They still do. But not Trump's suggestion that illegals voted, and in large numbers, mainly for Democratic candidates, including Hillary Clinton.

And, yes, Trump is right: Illegal votes may in part explain why Hillary now has a nearly two-million-vote lead in the popular vote, even though she lost convincingly in the Electoral College. A Rasmussen Reports poll earlier this year found that 53% of the Democratic Party supports letting illegals vote (http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/rasmussen-poll-on-illegals-voting-reveals-political-motivation/), even though it's against the law. It's pretty clear why.

Yes, there is room for skepticism of any claim that's made. But every vote cast by someone who isn't by law permitted to vote disenfranchises American citizens. The charge should at least be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, we will expect the media to continue to give its fawning attention to the spurious challenges of nonexistent vote tampering leveled by Hillary Clinton and Jill Stein, on behalf of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party.

While the media savage Trump and his motives, please recall what Hillary said in the debates: that the idea a defeated candidate wouldn't recognize the results of the election was "horrifying." And she has also agreed there is no "actionable evidence" of either hacking or outside interference, despite joining with Stein to seek recounts.

So what about Clinton's motives?


As for Stein, who barely registered a blip on the 2016 electoral screen, the $5 million or so she has raised to pay for recounts really seems more like a ploy to bail out her failed campaign than a serious attempt at a recount. But the media continue to treat her like a serious political operator — not the far-left kook she is.




http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-is-right-millions-of-illegals-probably-did-vote-in-2016/

Brian4Liberty
01-24-2017, 12:49 AM
I have no evidence of any murders in Chicago last year. Guess there weren't any.

CPUd
01-24-2017, 12:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smp8GIuqRDU

timosman
01-24-2017, 12:50 AM
Also, why the hell do they use the word "debunked"??

All the media did was ignore the evidence and pretend nothing existed, then they covered their ears and screamed "Lalalalallala!!" and said that he made it up.. But there are studies that back up these claims.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubIpoPjBUds

TheCount
01-24-2017, 03:50 AM
In 2008, there were about 2.8 million votes from illegal immigrants.[citation needed]

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-24-2017, 03:55 AM
[citation needed]


Needed for what? You are not interested in any kind of real discussion. You get a neg rep for that.

angelatc
01-24-2017, 09:33 AM
In 2008, there were about 2.8 million votes from illegal immigrants. So it makes sense that in 2016 there were about 3-4 million. Donald Trump totally has the facts behind him on this one.

Then if you add in all the dead people who voted and such, I'm pretty sure you would have 3-4 million illegal votes for Hillary.. I mean, I'm pretty sure most illegals would have voted for Hillary since Trump wanted to deport them.. and dead people always seem to vote Democrat.

I agree. His statement might be unproven, but it has not been debunked anywhere that I've seen. Detroit alone had thousands of documented phantom votes...more votes than ballots. Combined with the scenarios you mentioned (the traditional Chicago democrat dead and the illegal immigrants voting in California) I suspect the race was much closer than we're being told.

angelatc
01-24-2017, 09:36 AM
[citation needed]

Shame on those of you who didn't just supply the George Mason study: https://www.scribd.com/document/332480549/Do-Non-Citizens-Vote-in-US-Elections-Richman-Research-Study

Schifference
01-24-2017, 09:41 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUN6FsQFOkY

rpfocus
01-24-2017, 09:58 AM
"But, but, but what about the 5 million illegal immigrants who voted in California?" :rolleyes:

BTW, he's still hiding his tax returns, right? Just checking.

angelatc
01-24-2017, 10:16 AM
"But, but, but what about the 5 million illegal immigrants who voted in California?" :rolleyes:

BTW, he's still hiding his tax returns, right? Just checking.

^ This is why we can't have nice discussions.

rpfocus
01-24-2017, 10:21 AM
^ This is why we can't have nice discussions.

Ah yes, it's never a nice discussion when dissenting opinions are involved, right?

Brian4Liberty
01-24-2017, 10:23 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Smp8GIuqRDU

Lol. What an idiot. Pretending to be logical, while lacking any semblance of logic.

Why would Trump oppose a recount? Because he won, duh! A recount would not uncover illegal voters, thus it would not prove or deny his claim of non-citizen voters.

IIRC, in the recounts that actually happened due to Stein, Trump gained votes, which pretty much proves standard shennagins of the "add a vote here, throw out a vote there" by local apparatchiks.

angelatc
01-24-2017, 10:43 AM
Ah yes, it's never a nice discussion when dissenting opinions are involved, right?

1. Trump alleges voter fraud.
2. Media says that's been debunked.
3. Some of say no, it hasn't.
4. Some of us cite sources that indicate there are grounds for the theory.
5. You fabricate a quote, then for some odd reason throw in tax returns.

You did not offer an opinion, much less anything to substantiate it, then you threw in an unrelated subject. I won't be responding to your response to this post, so go ahead - you can have the last word.

Ender
01-24-2017, 11:14 AM
Shame on those of you who didn't just supply the George Mason study: https://www.scribd.com/document/332480549/Do-Non-Citizens-Vote-in-US-Elections-Richman-Research-Study


Can't directly copy your link but in it's conclusion it states that the non-citizen voting rate was quite small.

https://www.scribd.com/document/332480549/Do-Non-Citizens-Vote-in-US-Elections-Richman-Research-Study?content=10079&ad_group=Online+Tracking+Link&campaign=Skimbit%2C+Ltd.&keyword=ft500noi&source=impactradius&medium=affiliate&irgwc=1

CPUd
01-24-2017, 11:16 AM
Huckabee pushes back on Trump's debunked voter fraud claim

Mike Huckabee, the Republican former Arkansas governor, joined others on Tuesday in pushing back on President Donald Trump’s repeatedly debunked claim that millions of undocumented immigrants voted illegally in the November election and cost him the popular vote.

“I have no evidence whatsoever, and I don't know that anyone does, that there were that many illegal people who voted, and frankly it doesn't matter,” Huckabee told Fox Business Network on Monday morning. “He's the president and whether 20 million people voted, it doesn't matter anymore. He's the president, and I'm not sure why he brought it up.”

There is no evidence to support Trump’s assertion, first made in a series of tweets last November and deemed false by several independent fact-checkers since, that his loss in the popular vote was a result of millions of people voting illegally for Hillary Clinton. Despite Trump’s insinuations to the contrary, voter fraud is exceedingly rare in the U.S. and widespread voter fraud is virtually nonexistent.

But Trump repeated the theory again on Monday in a closed-door meeting with congressional leaders, in which he also talked about the size of his inauguration crowd, another figure he has exaggerated.

It remains unclear why Trump continues to make this claim months after the election, but his critics regularly invoke his loss in the popular vote to argue that he and Republicans in Congress do not have a mandate.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-voter-fraud-mike-huckabee-234107

rpfocus
01-24-2017, 11:27 AM
1. Trump alleges voter fraud.
2. Media says that's been debunked.
3. Some of say no, it hasn't.
4. Some of us cite sources that indicate there are grounds for the theory.
5. You fabricate a quote, then for some odd reason throw in tax returns.

You did not offer an opinion, much less anything to substantiate it, then you threw in an unrelated subject. I won't be responding to your response to this post, so go ahead - you can have the last word.

Not surprising you would take your ball and go home. In the Trump camp, as long as there is a 'theory' to float, nothing can be debunked. You want an opinion? Here you go: I don't believe for a second that there were 5 million illegal votes. Some are so anxious to disregard anything reported by the 'MSM' that they have lost grip on reality.

presence
01-24-2017, 11:46 AM
Is it wrong that I'm more offended by free-government-cheese "legal" immigrants/refugees voting
than I am by illegalized immigrant residents with privately sponsored jobs and homes who step into a booth?

Ender
01-24-2017, 12:20 PM
Is it wrong that I'm more offended by free-government-cheese "legal" immigrants/refugees voting
than I am by illegalized immigrant residents with privately sponsored jobs and homes who step into a booth?

Wish I could +rep you again. :cool:

Jamesiv1
01-24-2017, 12:25 PM
Best estimates say between 6-8 million illegal votes.

FSP-Rebel
01-24-2017, 12:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUN6FsQFOkY

Worth repeating.

timosman
01-24-2017, 12:51 PM
Worth repeating.

Worth impeaching.

Jamesiv1
01-24-2017, 12:52 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUN6FsQFOkY
"When you vote, you are a citizen."

lol

dannno
01-24-2017, 05:47 PM
Best estimates say between 6-8 million illegal votes.

Right, that's actually more realistic, the 3-4 million figure is a very conservative estimate.

CPUd
01-24-2017, 06:00 PM
Trump Won’t Back Down From His Voting Fraud Lie. Here Are the Facts.

WASHINGTON — During a private meeting with congressional leaders on Monday, President Trump asserted that between three million and five million unauthorized immigrants had voted for his Democratic opponent and robbed him of a victory in the national popular vote.

There is no evidence to support the claim, which has been discredited repeatedly by numerous fact-checkers.

That did not stop Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, from standing by the president’s words on Tuesday during a briefing with reporters at the White House. “As I said, I think the president has believed that for a while based on studies and information he has,” Mr. Spicer said.

That much appears to be true. Mr. Trump repeatedly raised doubts about the integrity of the American voting system in the period before the election in November and has falsely said since his victory that millions of people voted illegally.

Pressed to present the evidence on Tuesday, Mr. Spicer appeared to conflate two different studies that Mr. Trump’s staff had previously cited in defending his claim. “There’s one that came out of Pew in 2008 that showed 14 percent of people who voted were noncitizens,” Mr. Spicer said. “There’s other studies that have been presented to him.”
Here are the facts

Neither study Mr. Spicer apparently referred to supports Mr. Trump’s claim.

The first study was conducted in 2014 by professors at Old Dominion University and discussed on Monkey Cage, a blog hosted by The Washington Post. Using data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, the researchers found that 14 percent of noncitizens who responded to the survey in 2008 and 2010 said they were registered to vote.

The problem is that the study relied on flawed data and was roundly criticized by political scientists who said that a more careful examination of the data revealed no evidence that noncitizens had voted in recent elections.

The second study, conducted in 2012 by the Pew Center on the States, found that 24 million voter registrations were no longer valid or “significantly inaccurate”; that more than 1.8 million dead people were still listed on the voter rolls; and that almost three million were registered in multiple states, probably because they had moved from one state to another.

The study did not find evidence that those errors led to voter fraud, however, simply that they presented avoidable costs and inefficiencies in the electoral process.

The primary author of the study, David Becker, made that plain in a Twitter post in November.

803301967875321857
https://twitter.com/beckerdavidj/status/803301967875321857

On Tuesday, he wrote on Twitter that voting integrity in the November election had in fact improved.

823898627806523392
https://twitter.com/beckerdavidj/status/823898627806523392

The absence of studies supporting the claim is not all that is working against Mr. Trump. Election and law enforcement officials all over the country, who monitored reports of voter fraud state by state, have said they found no credible evidence of widespread fraud.
The reaction in Congress

Mr. Trump’s assertion likewise found little backing from his Republican colleagues on Capitol Hill.

“I’ve seen no evidence to that effect,” House Speaker Paul D. Ryan told reporters on Monday when asked about the purported voter fraud.

In an interview with CNN, Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, urged Mr. Trump to “knock this off.”

“This is going to erode his ability to govern this country if he does not stop it,” Mr. Graham said, adding that the president needed to present evidence for his beliefs if he was going to continue to profess them.

Others simply deflected questions about Mr. Trump’s claims.

Asked about the accuracy of the president’s assessment, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, chose to answer a question no one had asked.

“It does occur,” he said of voter fraud, declining to quantify the scope. “There are always arguments on both sides about how much, how frequent and all the rest.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/us/politics/unauthorized-immigrant-voting-trump-lie.html

dannno
01-24-2017, 06:07 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/24/us/politics/unauthorized-immigrant-voting-trump-lie.html

How exactly was the survey flawed data?

14% of non-citizens said they were registered to vote.

Then Harvard comes out and says zero illegal aliens voted.

Who has more credibility here?

Think, McFly, think.

PatriotOne
01-24-2017, 06:31 PM
“I have no evidence whatsoever, and I don't know that anyone does, that there were that many illegal people who voted, and frankly it doesn't matter,” Huckabee told Fox Business Network on Monday morning. “He's the president and whether 20 million people voted, it doesn't matter anymore. He's the president, and I'm not sure why he brought it up.”

Because voter fraud needs to be addressed for future election's Einstein?

GunnyFreedom
01-24-2017, 06:39 PM
I do not honestly understand how voter fraud can be 'debunked,' when we are largely prohibited by law from collecting the evidence required to support it. Maybe it's a myth, maybe it's true, who knows? As long as Uncle Sam continues to prohibit the identification of voters, we will never have a control group from which to produce analyses.

Anti Federalist
01-24-2017, 07:18 PM
I do not honestly understand how voter fraud can be 'debunked,' when we are largely prohibited by law from collecting the evidence required to support it. Maybe it's a myth, maybe it's true, who knows? As long as Uncle Sam continues to prohibit the identification of voters, we will never have a control group from which to produce analyses.

Bingo.

Zip and I already went around the mulberry bush on this.

One study 3 million had voted, the other that zero percent of the voting bloc was comprised of undocumented immigrants voting.

Zero?

Seriously?

They claim that this "debunks" the first study:


The first study was conducted in 2014 by professors at Old Dominion University and discussed on Monkey Cage, a blog hosted by The Washington Post. Using data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study, the researchers found that 14 percent of noncitizens who responded to the survey in 2008 and 2010 said they were registered to vote.

The problem is that the study relied on flawed data and was roundly criticized by political scientists who said that a more careful examination of the data revealed no evidence that noncitizens had voted in recent elections.

Like Gunny just stated, you are trying to prove the unknowable...an illegal act of which no official records are kept.

Freaking ridiculous on the face of it.

CPUd
01-24-2017, 07:35 PM
LOL they are holding up posters and asking Trump's nominees which crowd is bigger:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTu8BL9eH4I

69360
01-24-2017, 08:09 PM
3 million illegals voted causing Trump to lose the popular vote. Period.

This is an alternative fact.

MAGA.

AZJoe
01-24-2017, 08:48 PM
LOL they are holding up posters and asking Trump's nominees which crowd is bigger:

Glad to see both the Senators and the MSM is once again focusing on the important issues and events, and not distracting us with more trivial and irrelevant pointlessness.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/20161114_distract.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-j5mL5CcAAbsQZ.jpg

CPUd
01-24-2017, 08:50 PM
Ryan Defies Trump on Illegal Immigrant Vote Claim


(AP) — The Latest on activities in Congress (all times EST):

Breaking with President Donald Trump, Speaker Paul Ryan says he has seen no evidence that 3 million to 5 million immigrants living in the U.S. illegally voted last November and cost the Republican the popular vote.

Ryan told reporters on Tuesday: “I’ve already commented on that I’ve seen no evidence to that effect.”

His comments came hours after Trump incorrectly claimed at a White House reception with congressional leaders, including Ryan, that he lost the popular vote to Democratic rival Hillary Clinton because of the vote by those here illegally.

That’s according to a Democratic aide familiar with the exchange who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private meeting.

There is no evidence to support Trump’s claim.

Another Republican, Pennsylvania Rep. Charlie Dent, said Trump needs to move on. “The election is over,” Dent said, and Trump “won fair and square.” Trump needs to “get to the serious business of governing,” Dent said.

__

10:05 a.m.

House Speaker Paul Ryan says he has invited President Donald Trump to address a Joint Session of Congress on Feb. 28.

Ryan announced the invitation on Tuesday, informing reporters after a meeting with House Republicans. Ryan had met with Trump Monday night at the White House. Trump also met with Republican and Democratic congressional leaders on Monday.

Trump was sworn in as the 45th president on Friday. It would be his first speech to Congress.

__

10 a.m.

Congressional analysts are projecting that President Donald Trump has inherited a stable economy and a government that is on track to run a $559 billion budget deficit for the ongoing budget year.

The new estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office also say the economy will hold relatively steady. Economic growth is projected to rise slightly to 2.3 percent this year and unemployment to average less than 5 percent for the duration of Trump’s term.

The latest CBO figures are in line with previous projections. They come as Trump and Republicans controlling Congress are working to repeal much of former President Barack Obama’s signature health care law, boost the Pentagon budget, and reform the loophole cluttered tax code.

Balancing the budget would require cuts to domestic agencies and big health programs like Medicare.

https://www.teaparty.org/ryan-defies-trump-illegal-immigrant-vote-claim-214654/

Jamesiv1
01-24-2017, 08:55 PM
Glad to see both the Senators and the MSM is once again focusing on the important issues and events, and not distracting us with more trivial and irrelevant pointlessness.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/20161114_distract.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B-j5mL5CcAAbsQZ.jpg
Good post.

"You must spread some reputation around..."

angelatc
01-24-2017, 09:02 PM
Bingo.

Zip and I already went around the mulberry bush on this.

One study 3 million had voted, the other that zero percent of the voting bloc was comprised of undocumented immigrants voting.

Zero?

Seriously?

They claim that this "debunks" the first study:



Like Gunny just stated, you are trying to prove the unknowable...an illegal act of which no official records are kept.

Freaking ridiculous on the face of it.

But arguing a point that makes absolutely no sense. They are here illegally. They openly flaunt every law, because so far in their experience government will eventually modify the law to accommodate them.

Thinking they are not breaking THIS law doesn't make sense. Why wouldn't they vote?

Ender
01-24-2017, 09:05 PM
Bingo.

Zip and I already went around the mulberry bush on this.

One study 3 million had voted, the other that zero percent of the voting bloc was comprised of undocumented immigrants voting.

Zero?

Seriously?

They claim that this "debunks" the first study:



Like Gunny just stated, you are trying to prove the unknowable...an illegal act of which no official records are kept.

Freaking ridiculous on the face of it.

'Zackly- so why is Trump still on it? He won- he's in the WH- just move on.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-24-2017, 09:46 PM
Fake news.

CPUd
01-24-2017, 09:59 PM
'Zackly- so why is Trump still on it? He won- he's in the WH- just move on.

Apparently his feels were hurt. Donald needs a safe space from the press.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef42kffeyr8

823619473601077248
https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/823619473601077248

unknown
01-24-2017, 10:02 PM
His insecurity over "winning" the election makes sense when you consider that he doesnt believe in the electoral college.

angelatc
01-24-2017, 11:05 PM
Can't directly copy your link but in it's conclusion it states that the non-citizen voting rate was quite small.

https://www.scribd.com/document/332480549/Do-Non-Citizens-Vote-in-US-Elections-Richman-Research-Study?content=10079&ad_group=Online+Tracking+Link&campaign=Skimbit%2C+Ltd.&keyword=ft500noi&source=impactradius&medium=affiliate&irgwc=1

Here's their conclusion, and the source of the oft-cited 2.8 million:
Taking the least conservative measure e at least one indicator showed that the respondent voted e yields an estimate that between 7.9% and 14.7% percent of non-citizens voted in 2008. Since the adult noncitizen population of the United States was roughly 19.4 million (CPS, 2011), the number of non-citizen voters (including both uncertainty based on normally distributed sampling error, and the various combinations of verified and reported voting) could range from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum.

Ender
01-24-2017, 11:51 PM
Here's their conclusion, and the source of the oft-cited 2.8 million:

The problem is the word "could".

TheTexan
01-25-2017, 12:00 AM
3 million illegals voted causing Trump to lose the popular vote. Period.

This is an alternative fact.

MAGA.

He has lots of sources for this, great sources. You wouldn't believe, how many sources he has for this

Anti Federalist
01-25-2017, 12:15 AM
'Zackly- so why is Trump still on it? He won- he's in the WH- just move on.

It's how the man is.

I know the personality type.

angelatc
01-25-2017, 09:34 AM
It's how the man is.

I know the personality type.

Yeah. This will either be the key to his success or key in his eventual downfall. He can't let ANYTHING go.

Superfluous Man
01-25-2017, 10:27 AM
The dems have a near monopoly on voter fraud and have for some time. Was it 3 million? 2 million? 500k? Who knows.

The answer to that question makes a world of difference.

Is even 500,000 even within the realm of possibility? Or is it more like 1,000?

CPUd
01-25-2017, 11:11 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSwPvkd1KT8

timosman
01-25-2017, 11:19 AM
:cool:

seapilot
01-25-2017, 11:21 AM
I do not honestly understand how voter fraud can be 'debunked,' when we are largely prohibited by law from collecting the evidence required to support it. Maybe it's a myth, maybe it's true, who knows? As long as Uncle Sam continues to prohibit the identification of voters, we will never have a control group from which to produce analyses.

Hammer meet nail. No way to conclusively prove or debunk the illegal voter. Dead people voting can be discovered easily as that is recorded, as well as ballot box stuffing. Both actions the democrats have been caught red handed in the most recent election.

Zippyjuan
01-25-2017, 12:50 PM
How exactly was the survey flawed data?

14% of non-citizens said they were registered to vote.

Then Harvard comes out and says zero illegal aliens voted.

Who has more credibility here?

Think, McFly, think.

The person who collected the data that was based on said they contacted the people who claimed in the online survey that they were not citizens and voted. All said they clicked the wrong button in the survey. In different parts of the same survey they indicated they were citizens and in another part that they were not. (this was on the radio so I have no link at the moment).

CPUd
01-25-2017, 12:55 PM
There's a video of the survey author in an interview as well.

dannno
01-25-2017, 01:22 PM
The person who collected the data that was based on said they contacted the people who claimed in the online survey that they were not citizens and voted. All said they clicked the wrong button in the survey.

lol.. 14.4% of people and they all clicked the wrong button?

You do realize they were admitting to a crime, correct?

I can only imagine if they did an online survey about drug use, "Do you use cocaine?", and they contacted the people who said "Yes" to make sure that they do in fact use cocaine, and make sure that all of the other information on the survey is correct.. What do you think would happen in that case, zippo?? I'll tell you what would happen. The SAME THING would happen. And the study's author would have to come out and say, "Welp, we did an online survey and found that 2% of respondents use cocaine.. But we contacted them to verify and they all said they pressed the wrong button. So, even though there are hundreds of billions of dollars of cocaine that flow into the country every year, we found in fact that 0% of the population does cocaine. Isn't that fucking intesting?"

You gotta think these things through a little more, zip.

dannno
01-25-2017, 01:22 PM
There's a video of the survey author in an interview as well.

OMG a video!! WOW!!!!!

Superfluous Man
01-25-2017, 01:30 PM
If somebody thinks that a survey saying 14% of noncitizens are registered to vote is credible, and that person tells somebody else they need to think, we're dealing with such a thick skull that engagement is probably a waste of time.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-25-2017, 03:04 PM
The person who collected the data that was based on said they contacted the people who claimed in the online survey that they were not citizens and voted. All said they clicked the wrong button in the survey. In different parts of the same survey they indicated they were citizens and in another part that they were not. (this was on the radio so I have no link at the moment).



Wrong again.

Zippyjuan
01-25-2017, 05:56 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attorneys-said-no-evidence-voter-fraud-2017-1


Trump's own attorneys have conceded there is no evidence of voter fraud

President Donald Trump on Tuesday called for a "major investigation" into his baseless claims of widespread voter fraud — but his own lawyers are on record saying there is no such evidence that such fraud exists in the US.

Late last year, attorneys representing Trump wrote as much in court filings submitted to squash recount efforts by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein in Michigan and Pennsylvania, The Washington Post reported in December.

In the filing submitted in Michigan on behalf of Trump's campaign, Trump's lawyers made a direct statement that no evidence pointed to voter fraud existing in the 2016 election.

"On what basis does Stein seek to disenfranchise Michigan citizens?" the filing said. "None really, save for speculation. All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake."

The lawyers wrote that the purpose of Stein's recount effort was "to sow doubts regarding the legitimacy of the presidential election."

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-25-2017, 06:03 PM
Speaking of fraud. Look who just showed up.

Zippyjuan
01-25-2017, 06:11 PM
Comments by the authors of the study claiming non- citizens voted:


The Study's Authors Outlined The Limitations Of Their Findings. In a October 24 blog in The Washington Post, Jessie Richman and David Earnest, two authors of the study, admitted that their "extrapolation to specific state-level or district-level election outcomes is fraught with substantial uncertainty." The authors noted that the non-citizen sample they examined was "modest" and relied on self-reporting, which can create errors, and attempts to verify the accuracy of the self-reporting was imperfect and supplemented by estimates.

They admit it was flawed.

agitator
01-25-2017, 06:11 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVQV_ZhQu60

agitator
01-25-2017, 06:13 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fob-AGgZn44

silverhandorder
01-25-2017, 06:14 PM
Comments by the authors of the study claiming non- citizens voted:



They admit it was flawed.
I admit I don't care.

agitator
01-25-2017, 06:14 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3KDidko0J4

jmdrake
01-25-2017, 06:19 PM
Wish I could +rep you again. :cool:

Got you covered. This is what I don't get. Trump won the election. The electoral college confirmed it. He's been sworn in. So why the hell is he even concerned with this?

Ender
01-25-2017, 06:24 PM
Got you covered. This is what I don't get. Trump won the election. The electoral college confirmed it. He's been sworn in. So why the hell is he even concerned with this?

EGO.

And thanks!

RandallFan
01-25-2017, 08:02 PM
The bigger message is mass third world immigration is not importing "freedom lovers" its importing Democrats. Dems, Beltway Libertarians, Neocons(SCHEUER to Judge nap.: teach our little brown brothers how to vote and how to elect people. ) are triggered by such rhetoric.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-25-2017, 08:08 PM
Got you covered. This is what I don't get. Trump won the election. The electoral college confirmed it. He's been sworn in. So why the hell is he even concerned with this?


Yeah, that's what I was thinking. It's like a basketball team winning and then the coach gives an earful to the ref.

ThePaleoLibertarian
01-25-2017, 08:11 PM
Got you covered. This is what I don't get. Trump won the election. The electoral college confirmed it. He's been sworn in. So why the hell is he even concerned with this?
Because losing the popular vote is a big part of the left wing narrative that he's illegitimate. Some are even saying that Hillary is the "rightful President". Hillary's popular vote victory is a big memetic boon, the biggest the Dems have had this election.

Schifference
01-25-2017, 08:14 PM
Because losing the popular vote is a big part of the left wing narrative that he's illegitimate. Some are even saying that Hillary is the "rightful President". Hillary's popular vote victory is a big memetic boon, the biggest the Dems have had this election.

This is why. Not Ego.

CPUd
01-25-2017, 08:21 PM
Because losing the popular vote is a big part of the left wing narrative that he's illegitimate. Some are even saying that Hillary is the "rightful President". Hillary's popular vote victory is a big memetic boon, the biggest the Dems have had this election.

It's similar to what happened in 2000 when Bush won a close election. What that means is approximately 50% of the voters put him on office, and the other 50% voted against him. Bush and even Obama who won by higher margins acknowledged this in their statements and actions after the election. Trump is doing something else, like going around saying he won a landslide. All this does is piss them off, so they poke at his insecurities.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-25-2017, 08:25 PM
Donnie should be schooling these dolts with a 6th grade civics lesson on the electoral college.

nikcers
01-25-2017, 08:33 PM
It's similar to what happened in 2000 when Bush won a close election. What that means is approximately 50% of the voters put him on office, and the other 50% voted against him. Bush and even Obama who won by higher margins acknowledged this in their statements and actions after the election. Trump is doing something else, like going around saying he won a landslide. All this does is piss them off, so they poke at his insecurities. It's because Trump doesn't really feel like he won, he feels cheated out of it. The popular vote was supposed to be his Trophy but the left is going to call him a cheater for the next X amount of years. He then has to create some sort of fantasy that appeals to him, and then encourages others to placate to his fantasy and punishes them when they don't. I just hope Trump doesn't start using his NSA powers to go after his critics over the internet.

266038556504494082


Trump: 'The next time we're going to win the old-fashioned way' (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/01/20/trump-next-time-were-going-win-old-fashioned-way/96817236/)

CPUd
01-25-2017, 08:36 PM
It's because Trump doesn't really feel like he won, he feels cheated out of it. The popular vote was supposed to be his Trophy but the left is going to call him a cheater for the next X amount of years. He then has to create some sort of fantasy that appeals to him, and then encourages others to placate to his fantasy and punishes them when they don't. I just hope Trump doesn't start using his NSA powers to go after his critics over the internet.

266038556504494082

States are already trying to make new laws to crack down on "violent protesters".

staerker
01-25-2017, 08:48 PM
Fake news!

824381951234686980

nikcers
01-25-2017, 08:52 PM
Yeah I just feel like this is just a distraction from the globalist joker game.

When he regurgitates the same evil Islam from Giuliani's mouth it just feels like he is mocking our intelligence. Evil Islam needs to go, we need to destroy evil Islam. I think this religious Spanish Inquisition shit is disheartening, from people who are supposed to protect freedom. We have to go destroy evil Islam people because they have a different Idea then us, and they are thousands of miles away and wouldn't even know who I was if I wasn't bombing their back yard.

jmdrake
01-28-2017, 03:03 PM
Because losing the popular vote is a big part of the left wing narrative that he's illegitimate. Some are even saying that Hillary is the "rightful President". Hillary's popular vote victory is a big memetic boon, the biggest the Dems have had this election.

And? If Trump is unable to definitely prove his case, and the smart money is on that, then he will bolster the left's argument for them. It's a stupid move that only plays to his ego. It's like arguing over how many people watched his inauguration versus Obama's.

jmdrake
01-28-2017, 03:12 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attorneys-said-no-evidence-voter-fraud-2017-1
Trump's own attorneys have conceded there is no evidence of voter fraud

President Donald Trump on Tuesday called for a "major investigation" into his baseless claims of widespread voter fraud — but his own lawyers are on record saying there is no such evidence that such fraud exists in the US.

Late last year, attorneys representing Trump wrote as much in court filings submitted to squash recount efforts by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein in Michigan and Pennsylvania, The Washington Post reported in December.

In the filing submitted in Michigan on behalf of Trump's campaign, Trump's lawyers made a direct statement that no evidence pointed to voter fraud existing in the 2016 election.

"On what basis does Stein seek to disenfranchise Michigan citizens?" the filing said. "None really, save for speculation. All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake."

The lawyers wrote that the purpose of Stein's recount effort was "to sow doubts regarding the legitimacy of the presidential election."


^This

jmdrake
01-28-2017, 03:18 PM
Donnie should be schooling these dolts with a 6th grade civics lesson on the electoral college.

But first he has to understand it himself. Maybe Barron Trump can give the lesson.

Superfluous Man
01-28-2017, 03:36 PM
Because losing the popular vote is a big part of the left wing narrative that he's illegitimate.

That's not the reason he cares.

He can't stand the idea that he's not as popular as he insists he is. He desperately wants to be more liked than Hillary, not just out in Hicksville, but all over the country, including the high class urban areas he in his heart identifies with more.

Also, it's not just because of the left wing narrative, it's his own narrative that he himself used briefly when he thought that Romney was going to lose the electoral college and win the popular vote in 2012.

Superfluous Man
01-28-2017, 03:38 PM
Donnie should be schooling these dolts with a 6th grade civics lesson on the electoral college.

That would be awkward in light of these tweets of his:

The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012


We can't let this happen. We should march on Washington and stop this travesty. Our nation is totally divided!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012


Lets fight like hell and stop this great and disgusting injustice! The world is laughing at us.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012



This election is a total sham and a travesty. We are not a democracy!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a8294941/donald-trump-electoral-college-opinions-election-2016/

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 04:12 PM
That would be awkward in light of these tweets of his:







http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a8294941/donald-trump-electoral-college-opinions-election-2016/




That was four years ago. Maybe he learned something. Wouldn't that be called growth?


And I have asked you twice if you are user erowe1. Are you going to answer me?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 04:13 PM
That's not the reason he cares.

He can't stand the idea that he's not as popular as he insists he is. He desperately wants to be more liked than Hillary, not just out in Hicksville, but all over the country, including the high class urban areas he in his heart identifies with more.

Also, it's not just because of the left wing narrative, it's his own narrative that he himself used briefly when he thought that Romney was going to lose the electoral college and win the popular vote in 2012.


It looks to me like a little bit of both.

CPUd
01-28-2017, 04:19 PM
That's not the reason he cares.

He can't stand the idea that he's not as popular as he insists he is. He desperately wants to be more liked than Hillary, not just out in Hicksville, but all over the country, including the high class urban areas he in his heart identifies with more.

Also, it's not just because of the left wing narrative, it's his own narrative that he himself used briefly when he thought that Romney was going to lose the electoral college and win the popular vote in 2012.

President Donald has explained what he did his first day in office. Surprisingly, it is nothing on the list of things he said on the campaign trail. Instead, he spend the afternoon calling the Park Service, ordering them not to retweet comparison photos, and instead to find him some more pictures of his inauguration, which he promptly had hung on the walls in the WH:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Brg2iSu8po8

Superfluous Man
01-28-2017, 06:30 PM
That was four years ago. Maybe he learned something. Wouldn't that be called growth?


Right. And it's just a pure coincidence that both positions were advantageous to him at the time that he held them.

Are you under the impression that he has learned about the Constitution and federalism in the past 4 years and genuinely changed his views on account of that?

RJB
01-28-2017, 06:40 PM
And I have asked you twice if you are user erowe1. Are you going to answer me?

That is a legit question.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 06:47 PM
Right. And it's just a pure coincidence that both positions were advantageous to him at the time that he held them.

Are you under the impression that he has learned about the Constitution and federalism in the past 4 years and genuinely changed his views on account of that?



I don't know what he thinks. I know he's an opportunist. He does recognize the importance of states, which is a lot more than Clinton voters. He said (linked to your article);



But I would rather see it where you went with simple votes. You know, you get 100 million votes and somebody else gets 90 million votes and you win. There’s a reason for doing this because it brings all the states into play. Electoral College and there’s something very good about that. But this is a different system. But I respect it. I do respect the system.


The good thing about his obnoxiousness is that somebody--SOMEBODY--finally put all this PC obnoxiousness in it's place. Merchants who were tired of spending money fixing their bathrooms (NC, HB 2) got tired of liberals calling them names. No, a father being concerned about his daughter in the bathroom is not prejudiced. He's just concerned about his daughter.

And this is coming from someone who does not even like him.

Superfluous Man
01-28-2017, 06:51 PM
The good thing about his obnoxiousness is that somebody--SOMEBODY--finally put all this PC obnoxiousness in it's place. Merchants who were tired of spending money fixing their bathrooms (NC, HB 2) got tired of liberals calling them names. No, a father being concerned about his daughter in the bathroom is not prejudiced. He's just concerned about his daughter.

You know Trump sides with those wanting trannies to use the bathrooms of their choice right?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 06:52 PM
And I have asked you [Superfluous Man] twice if you are user erowe1. Are you going to answer me?


That is a legit question.


Yeah, I actually like some of erowe1's posts, especially in the religion section. I mostly read that section and don't post because I don't know what I am talking about and some many others do. Also, people like TER and you, RJB.

Superfluous Man posts on nothing but Don. I have a feeling some people here are creating accounts just for that purpose.

staerker
01-28-2017, 06:56 PM
Veritas Voter Fraud Compilation - #VoterFraudIsReal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCldQRaPXwo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCldQRaPXwo

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 06:56 PM
You know Trump sides with those wanting trannies to use the bathrooms of their choice right?


I am not talking about the tiny minority of people who actually get sex changes, and I doubt he is talking about that either. I am talking about transvestites and other people who one day feel all girly and want to go with how they "identify."

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 06:59 PM
So Superfluous Man told me elsewhere "I don't answer questions about who I am." So I'll bet a cyber nickel he is erowe1. :rolleyes:

silverhandorder
01-28-2017, 07:01 PM
So Superfluous Man told me elsewhere "I don't answer questions about who I am." So I'll bet a cyber nickel he is erowe1. :rolleyes:

I could believe that. Same whiny tone.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-28-2017, 07:03 PM
I could believe that. Same whiny tone.


You could probably match up their posts side-by-side and really nail it down. Not really even sure why he'd do that. It's not like he's ZippyJuan or TheCount.

cindy25
01-28-2017, 07:20 PM
while not in millions there certainly are several hundred, perhaps thousands, in most states.

this could flip a state, or even the presidency.

I knew someone in the late 70s who had some to the USA from Ireland in the 20s, never became a citizen, and always voted, from the 40s until she died. no one ever asked.

Superfluous Man
01-28-2017, 07:21 PM
I am not talking about the tiny minority of people who actually get sex changes, and I doubt he is talking about that either. I am talking about transvestites and other people who one day feel all girly and want to go with how they "identify."

That's what he said he supports. He was asked about it in the context of that exact debate.

timosman
01-28-2017, 07:23 PM
while not in millions there certainly are several hundred, perhaps thousands, in most states.

this could flip a state, or even the presidency.

I knew someone in the late 70s who had some to the USA from Ireland in the 20s, never became a citizen, and always voted, from the 40s until she died. no one ever asked.

You did not report a crime? :eek:

Superfluous Man
01-28-2017, 07:31 PM
while not in millions there certainly are several hundred, perhaps thousands, in most states.

this could flip a state, or even the presidency.

I knew someone in the late 70s who had some to the USA from Ireland in the 20s, never became a citizen, and always voted, from the 40s until she died. no one ever asked.

No one ever asked what?

She had to register to vote in order for her name to be on the voter list.

CPUd
01-29-2017, 12:34 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s7mQvB0HGw

Schifference
01-29-2017, 05:04 AM
officials “couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts” during last month’s countywide canvass of Election Day returns, adding that most are in Clinton stronghold Detroit, “where the number of ballots in precinct poll books did not match those of voting machine printout reports in 59 percent of precincts, 392 of 662.”

dannno
01-29-2017, 05:31 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5s7mQvB0HGw

Wow, thanks for posting.. that's a great interview.

Embarrassed? Really?? The host is saying that when he is saying a number like 3 million, it has to be a fixed, exact number not off by 30,000... What difference does it make?

The polls you post all the time are off by more than this guy's numbers.

Do you REALLY want this information released? You want him to put out the names of millions of people who have committed felonies? Especially when he is admitting the data is only like 99.5% accurate?

He also said that 3 million was the conservative number..

NorthCarolinaLiberty
01-29-2017, 05:43 AM
That's what he said he supports. He was asked about it in the context of that exact debate.

Source?

CPUd
01-29-2017, 06:12 AM
Wow, thanks for posting.. that's a great interview.

Embarrassed? Really?? The host is saying that when he is saying a number like 3 million, it has to be a fixed, exact number not off by 30,000... What difference does it make?

The polls you post all the time are off by more than this guy's numbers.

Do you REALLY want this information released? You want him to put out the names of millions of people who have committed felonies? Especially when he is admitting the data is only like 99.5% accurate?

He also said that 3 million was the conservative number..

That's a pretty good impression.

timosman
01-29-2017, 07:26 AM
That's a pretty good impression.

:confused:

UWDude
01-29-2017, 09:49 AM
EGO.

And thanks!

Maybe, just maybe, he actually cares about the integrity of the voting system?


Haters so full of hate, cant even see what is happening.

Ender mr "I try to see both sides"

No you dont

you're just a hater.

staerker
01-29-2017, 11:58 AM
bump


Veritas Voter Fraud Compilation - #VoterFraudIsReal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCldQRaPXwo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCldQRaPXwo

Ender
01-29-2017, 01:02 PM
Maybe, just maybe, he actually cares about the integrity of the voting system?


Haters so full of hate, cant even see what is happening.

Ender mr "I try to see both sides"

No you dont

you're just a hater.

LOL

Looking in the mirror, Mr. Name-Caller?

timosman
01-29-2017, 01:12 PM
LOL

Looking in the mirror, Mr. Name-Caller?

Ender aka. Zippy lite.

Zippyjuan
01-29-2017, 01:23 PM
bump

Can we see the unedited interview? Veritas is famous for editing videos to change what was really said to support their viewpoint.

timosman
01-29-2017, 01:55 PM
Can we see the unedited interview? Veritas is famous for editing videos to change what was really said to support their viewpoint.

Working on Saturday and Sunday?! I am getting worried about your operation. I would not work for anybody who does not observe Sabbath. :eek:

staerker
01-29-2017, 02:12 PM
Can we see the unedited interview? Veritas is famous for editing videos to change what was really said to support their viewpoint.

Which one was edited to change what was really said?

Zippyjuan
01-29-2017, 02:17 PM
http://www.salon.com/2016/10/18/james-okeefe-releases-another-project-veritas-video-claiming-hillary-clinton-campaign-is-bird-dogging/


O’Keefe and Project Veritas have been criticized in the past, however, for strategically editing footage to make false accusations.

In 2013, O’Keefe settled a suit for $100,000 after editing a recording with an ACORN employee who subsequently lost his job. Similarly, after O’Keefe and an associate posed as donors affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood in a sting operation at NPR, The Blaze examined the edited video against the raw footage and found manipulative editing.

He also basically says so in this tweet about refusing to release unedited video: https://twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/788771857814069250?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw



James O'Keefe
‏@JamesOKeefeIII

Follow
More
James O'Keefe Retweeted David Frum

Are "journalists" willing to produce their raw unedited materials to accompany their word arrangements? It'd probably paint a diff picture!

And here: http://thedailybanter.com/2016/10/video-fraudster-james-okeefe-refuses-to-release-unedited-dem-footage/


SEDER: But you can debunk that by releasing that video. Why wouldn’t you release all the video?

O’KEEFE: Because no journalist in their right mind would ever release their raw notebooks and if they did, Sam--

SEDER: Well, it’s not a notebook. It is caught on camera.

O’KEEFE: Let me tell you something: No journalist ever releases the raw, and the reason, and if they did, if all these journalists released the raw, you would see a different story. They piece words together to paint a specific portrait.

SEDER: So you paste the words together to paint--

O’KEEFE: No. I have video. I don’t just have words. I have video.
[...]

SEDER: Are you saying you did piece it together to paint a picture?

O’KEEFE: That’s what journalism is. Journalism is telling a story. And I will stand by every single edit. I will go to -- I will be in contempt of court to protect my undercover reporters because I’m standing for something greater than myself. I’m standing for the right of citizen journalists. No one here would ever dare release their raw. No one would.

staerker
01-29-2017, 02:38 PM
http://www.salon.com/2016/10/18/james-okeefe-releases-another-project-veritas-video-claiming-hillary-clinton-campaign-is-bird-dogging/

Okay troll. So tell me, which one was edited to change what was really said?

Zippyjuan
01-29-2017, 02:41 PM
Read much?


Similarly, after O’Keefe and an associate posed as donors affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood in a sting operation at NPR, The Blaze examined the edited video against the raw footage and found manipulative editing.

Also: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/is-it-okay-for-james-okeefes-investigative-reporting-to-rely-on-deception/2016/10/19/f32fd46a-962e-11e6-9b7c-57290af48a49_story.html?utm_term=.b9e7321160a4


An even bigger issue, however, has been the way in which O’Keefe has edited some of his videos.

In 2009, he and an associate posed as a pimp and prostitute to infiltrate ACORN, a community social-services agency. The resulting video showed ACORN members offering the pair advice on how to set up a brothel. It also showed outtakes of O’Keefe and his partner dressed in the flamboyant attire of street hustlers, suggesting they had appeared that way when they spoke to the officials. In fact, the footage of the pair in costume was spliced into the video after the ACORN meetings, a fact the video didn’t mention.

Congress subsequently defunded ACORN, leading to its demise. O’Keefe was later sued by one of his subjects, who claimed his privacy had been invaded by the surreptitious filming; O’Keefe settled the matter for $100,000, admitting no guilt.

O’Keefe’s 2011 sting of NPR executives was fraught with discrepancies between what one of the executives said and how his comments were framed in the video. Then-NPR executive Ron Schiller was quoted in the video as saying that tea party activists were “seriously racist people.” But the raw footage of the encounter showed that Schiller was quoting two Republicans who viewed the activists that way, not that he held such views.

staerker
01-29-2017, 02:44 PM
Read much?

Source fake news much? I don't need an anonymous quote to tell me what to think.

I know for a fact that you won't be able to point out any deceptive editing in the video I posted above.

You are here to troll and disrupt, not to have a conversation based in reality.

Zippyjuan
01-29-2017, 02:47 PM
Updated post to offer more examples. If you can find the original, raw footage we can compare what the video claims with what was really said but O'Keefe refuses to do so. I wonder why? If you want to talk about "fake news" O'Keefe is a great example.

staerker
01-29-2017, 02:50 PM
Updated post to offer more examples.

Updated post to dodge the video in discussion.


Veritas Voter Fraud Compilation - #VoterFraudIsReal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCldQRaPXwo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCldQRaPXwo

Ender
01-29-2017, 02:59 PM
Ender aka. Zippy lite.

I'm getting really tired of the name-calling and insults on this forum- whatever happened to having an intelligent conversation?

nikcers
01-29-2017, 03:02 PM
Maybe, just maybe, he actually cares about the integrity of the voting system?


Haters so full of hate, cant even see what is happening.

Ender mr "I try to see both sides"

No you dont

you're just a hater.
What does that make you a lover?

nikcers
01-29-2017, 03:03 PM
I'm getting really tired of the name-calling and insults on this forum- whatever happened to having an intelligent conversation? We decided to ignore Ron Paul and elect Ron Paul on steroids.

Ender
01-29-2017, 03:07 PM
We decided to ignore Ron Paul and elect Ron Paul on steroids.

Who is this Ron you speak of??? :confused: :rolleyes: :eek:

Zippyjuan
01-29-2017, 03:15 PM
We decided to ignore Ron Paul and elect Ron Paul on steroids.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/ron-paul-wont-vote-donald-trump/2016/05/04/id/727244/


Ron Paul: I Won't Vote For Trump

Ron Paul says he won't vote for presumed Republican nominee Donald Trump in the presidential elections, even if it meant it would hand the election to Democratic front-runer Hillary Clinton.

The former Republican congressman who ran for president with the Libertarian Party in 1988 said that it would not matter who won when he was asked in an appearance on the Morning with Maria Bartiromo Program on Fox Business Network.

Paul, who was also a candidate in the Republican primaries of 2008 and 2012, said neither candidate offers any solutions to the serious problems that the country faces and that "control of the system is much bigger than the political parties."






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWlRwjX0P6Q

nikcers
01-29-2017, 03:17 PM
Who is this Ron you speak of??? :confused: :rolleyes: :eek:

Here AJ claims Ron Paul is too purist, he spends a large amount of time explaining away what Ron Paul says while claiming to be a "trump cheer leader". Ron Paul tried saying Trump is trying to stop a Federal Reserve collapse. They framed the video as Trump is trying to save the world from "global collapse" which if the federal reserve collapses we get a "globalist collapse" but since he is a cheer leader he has to spin Ron Paul. I at least applaud him for allowing him to come on even though he was just trying to insinuate that Trump is Ron Paul on steroids for the entire time. Ron Paul even looks like he gets pissed at one point after he kept correcting him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYJR-_ZxOao

UWDude
01-29-2017, 09:21 PM
LOL

Looking in the mirror, Mr. Name-Caller?

I never claimed to "try to see both sides"

UWDude
01-29-2017, 09:22 PM
I'm getting really tired of the name-calling and insults on this forum- whatever happened to having an intelligent conversation?

Remember when you paraded your raped cousin around to gain moral superiority in your hyperbolic bash-fest?

"intelligent conversation"

Ender
01-29-2017, 10:17 PM
Remember when you paraded your raped cousin around to gain moral superiority in your hyperbolic bash-fest?

"intelligent conversation"

You've got some serious problems.

UWDude
01-29-2017, 10:43 PM
You've got some serious problems.

Do you remember?
Do you remember when you paraded your raped cousin around to gain moral superiority in your hyperbolic bash-fest, to insist that all those plastic women accusing Trump of sexual assault was real? Do you remember? That somehow having a family member sexually assaulted, gave you the say so on who should believed and who should not?

Remember that? remember that pathetic attempt? Is that your idea of "intelligent conversation", Ender?

Ender
01-29-2017, 10:45 PM
Do you remember?
Do you remember when you paraded your raped cousin around to gain moral superiority in your hyperbolic bash-fest, to insist that all those plastic women accusing Trump of sexual assault was real? Do you remember? That somehow having a family member sexually assaulted, gave you the say so on who should believed and who should not?

Remember that? remember that pathetic attempt? Is that your idea of "intelligent conversation", Ender?

Link?

UWDude
01-29-2017, 11:09 PM
Link?

It's a yes or no question, do you, or do you not remember it?
Surely the story sounds similar to something that happened in your family.

I know you know I am telling the truth, unless you were lying about the sexual assault incident in your family the first place, and can't keep track of your lies.

How do you think I know about it? Because you posted it. Right? Right Ender? I don't know your family, I certainly don't know about your families dirty little secrets. Somebody had to have posted about it on these boards to score a political point. It wasn't Zippy, it wasn't CPUd! It wasn't GunnyFreedom! It wasn't Anti-Federalist! Who do you suppose it was, Ender?

Ringing any bells, Ender?

You even tried to disqualify everyone else's opinion with some malarky about, "unless it has affected you personally, you have no right to question these noble victims of sexual abuse by a powerful man!"

As if a distant family member being sexually assaulted has caused you any kind of anguish.

You cheapen the word rape, you cheapen sexual assault, just to score points on the internet against people you don't even know.

Is that your idea of "intelligent conversation" Ender?

Acting like you need a link to refresh your memory about an incident in your distant family? "intelligent" to act stupid, and not even know what I am talking about, even though you damn well DO know what I am talking about?

Is playing dumb, intelligent, Ender?

Ender
01-30-2017, 12:17 AM
It's a yes or no question, do you, or do you not remember it?
Surely the story sounds similar to something that happened in your family.

I know you know I am telling the truth, unless you were lying about the sexual assault incident in your family the first place, and can't keep track of your lies.

How do you think I know about it? Because you posted it. Right? Right Ender? I don't know your family, I certainly don't know about your families dirty little secrets. Somebody had to have posted about it on these boards to score a political point. It wasn't Zippy, it wasn't CPUd! It wasn't GunnyFreedom! It wasn't Anti-Federalist! Who do you suppose it was, Ender?

Ringing any bells, Ender?

You even tried to disqualify everyone else's opinion with some malarky about, "unless it has affected you personally, you have no right to question these noble victims of sexual abuse by a powerful man!"

As if a distant family member being sexually assaulted has caused you any kind of anguish.

You cheapen the word rape, you cheapen sexual assault, just to score points on the internet against people you don't even know.

Is that your idea of "intelligent conversation" Ender?

Acting like you need a link to refresh your memory about an incident in your distant family? "intelligent" to act stupid, and not even know what I am talking about, even though you damn well DO know what I am talking about?

Is playing dumb, intelligent, Ender?

Oh, I remember talking about someone dear to me that had been raped but never told anyone until years later. And I remember saying that this is a condition that happens to a lot of women. They are abused and then afraid/ashamed to tell anyone.

Used to help run AA and NA meetings and the opening up on this subject alone was appalling.

So- leave this subject alone and quit labeling me and -neg repping me because YOU have some severe problems. Take your hate elsewhere and try to remember that this is a Ron Paul Forum.

UWDude
01-30-2017, 12:18 AM
Oh, I remember talking about someone dear to me that had been raped but never told anyone until years later. And I remember saying that this is a condition that happens to a lot of women. They are abused and then afraid/ashamed to tell anyone.

Used to help run AA and NA meetings and the opening up on this subject alone was appalling.

So- leave this subject alone and quit labeling me and -neg repping me because YOU have some severe problems. Take your hate elsewhere and try to remember that this is a Ron Paul Forum.


Oh, now you remember! How intelligent of you! Do you still need that link to jog your memory some more? Because now you are making it sound like you were just relating a story of empathy. Is that what you were doing, Ender? Or were you trying to score political points with someone else's rape?

Remember, there is a link out there. Write your next response very carefully as you try to justify yourself. And also remember, you are the one decrying the lack of "intelligent conversation" here.

I love listening to you stutter... y-y-you're c-crazy man! Y-y-you have sever issues! IS that intelligent conversation ender? I can guess what comes next, faux concern for my psychological well being. You will claim you actually are worried about my psychological health, and suggest I seek help. You are all so predictable. You sling insults, get called out for it, and claim it wasn't an insult, that you actually care. It's just more lies. You all are so used to lying, you don't even know you are lying anymore. So many of you here on these forums can not be honest, and just state your opinions. and rule 1 here is be honest and tell the truth. RULE 1 OF THE FORUMS.

No. I know exactly who I am. I know my center. I do have issues with people like you. You pretend to be a level headed observer, "both sides", you pretend you only engage in "intelligent conversation", you try to act like you are so damn mature. You aren't.



So- leave this subject alone

But you wanted a link, Ender. Do you still want that link? Then we can really dive into what you did and said in that day when 12 phony women came forward with phony accusations: Why you brought it up, how you tried to weaponize someone elses trauma to win a flame war. It could be a really interesting analysis to whatever happened to "intelligent conversation"

Or maybe you can just admit, you are just another dishonest troll on the internet, and you have not been interested in "intelligent conversation" for a long time.

Ender
01-30-2017, 12:21 AM
Oh, now you remember! How intelligent of you! Do you still need that link to jog your memory some more? Because now you are making it sound like you were just relating a story of empathy. Is that what you were doing, Ender? Or were you trying to score political points with someone else's rape?

Oh, I remember- but my post had nothing to do with you diatribe- it was about what many women go through that many men are completely unaware of.

Contumacious
01-30-2017, 12:22 AM
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/donald-trump-fraud-claims-234083

Have California bureaucrats investigated to see if only citizens voted?

.

UWDude
01-30-2017, 12:38 AM
Oh, I remember- but my post had nothing to do with you diatribe- it was about what many women go through that many men are completely unaware of.

Ahhh... I see, you think I don't have that link, so you can just rewrite history as you see fit.

dannno
01-30-2017, 01:37 AM
your raped cousin

Is that a band? Have they ever played at Comet Pizza?

dannno
01-30-2017, 01:39 AM
Have California bureaucrats investigated to see if only citizens voted?

.

http://www.drodd.com/images13/laughing-gif11.gif

Ender
01-30-2017, 02:00 AM
Ahhh... I see, you think I don't have that link, so you can just rewrite history as you see fit.

No- that's what YOU do.