Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dems to file new impeachment articles against Trump

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    Ahem, the dems cheated in CA.

    (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced it sent a notice-of-violation letter to the state of California and 11 of its counties threatening to sue in federal court if it does not clean its voter registration lists as mandated by the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA). Both the NVRA and the federal Help America Vote Act require states to take reasonable steps to maintain accurate voting rolls. The August 1 letter was sent on behalf of several Judicial Watch California supporters and the Election Integrity Project California, Inc.
    In the letter, Judicial Watch noted that public records obtained on the Election Assistance Commission’s 2016 Election Administration Voting Survey and through verbal accounts from various county agencies show 11 California counties have more registered voters than voting-age citizens: Imperial (102%), Lassen (102%), Los Angeles (112%), Monterey (104%), San Diego (138%), San Francisco (114%), San Mateo (111%), Santa Cruz (109%), Solano (111%), Stanislaus (102%), and Yolo (110%).
    In the letter, Judicial Watch noted that Los Angeles County officials “informed us that the total number of registered voters now stands at a number that is a whopping 144% of the total number of resident citizens of voting age.”


    https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...deral-lawsuit/
    I have no doubt that they cheated in a lot of States. They probably carried Nevada on the backs of illegal voters. But, the margin in California was wide enough, that they didn't need to cheat.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
      I have no doubt that they cheated in a lot of States. They probably carried Nevada on the backs of illegal voters. But, the margin in California was wide enough, that they didn't need to cheat.
      Man you really don't understand how out of control the libs are out here. They cheat because they must. Remember Prop Eight? I'm afraid that you guys just don't grasp how bad the election system is broken out here.

      There's a reason why people are fleeing this state...
      Credo quia absurdum.


      Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
        I have no doubt that they cheated in a lot of States. They probably carried Nevada on the backs of illegal voters. But, the margin in California was wide enough, that they didn't need to cheat.
        The cheat in California is that illegal immigrants are counted on the US census and therefore count in apportioning seats in Congress and the electoral college. California has roughly 6 seats in the House and 6 on the electoral college that represent illegal immigrants.

        That is those seats and votes are based on people who have no legal right to representation in our government.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
          A lot of what you say I think is true and accurate -- except for Trump's status as an outsider. You can't do big city real estate as an outsider. Doesn't work that way. Obama knew that: it's why he allowed his law license to lapse even before he made "of counsel" at his Chicago law firm, Miner Barnhill. Even though he was no longer an attorney-at-law he was still representing client, clients who racked up major billable hours. That's called lobbying. Obama did it. So too did Trump. Lobbying is not an activity normally performed by political outsiders.

          And just to prove that I'm not Trump-deranged, see how uber-progressive Bernie Sanders backs fake progressive Bill de Blasio -- Bill de Blasio of the real estate interests de Blasio.
          Republicans to a man seem obsessed with the idea of being a political outsider. The problem is that, almost again to a man, they have no idea what that means. Remember that the GOP is the party that elected an “outsider” who happened to be the governor of one of the largest states and a son of a president. Twice.

          It almost makes the Democrat’s penchant for long-serving party flunkies refreshingly honest... if putting Democrat and honest in the same sentence didn’t hurt me physically.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
            Who care is everyone is happy?

            They never will be, so why even bring that up?

            And the Hillabeast's claim to the popular vote is based on a very weak foundation, given the DNC's long history of voter fraud.
            Funnily enough, anger is a strong motivating force for elections. Nothing gets people out to vote like being upset at something.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
              Constitutionally, there is no such thing as a national popular vote. It has zero legal meaning.

              Less than half of the voters supported Clinton as well. Neither candidate won a popular majority.

              Clinton won California by 4.3 million votes. Trump won the other 49 States by 1.4 million votes. You can also put Clinton's entire popular vote margin into about 12 counties in and around New York City and Los Angeles, with Trump winning the popular vote in the rest of the country.

              If the objective was to win a national popular vote, both candidates would have campaigned differently and voters would have turned out differently - Republican turnout would have been higher in dark blue States and Democrat turnout would have been higher in dark red States. Actually, total turnout would have provably been higher in essentially uncontested States.

              The national popular vote has no more meaning than the Dodgers scoring as many runs as the Astros in 2017 or the 1960 Yankees outscoring the Pirates.

              The nonsensical babble about Clinton winning the popular vote serves no other purpose than to make Democrats feel better about losing and perpetuate the delusional fantasy that they can find a mechanism to overturn the Election and install Clinton in the White House. It's their participation trophy.
              Again, two different meanings here.

              It has zero functional meaning when looking at the election itself. None. The election isn’t decided by a national vote.

              It does, however, have meaning when talking to voters, or in how they represent the election. The fact that people are still talking about it illustrates that people have given it meaning and it does resonate with people. Hell, people posting here about it illustrates that it has meaning. Even those laughing at it are still talking about it.

              It also goes the other way. Trump can’t claim he represents the will of the American people or the American voter. But again, that doesn’t make his ellection electorally invalid or any other nonsense. More Americans voted against him than for him, but he got the right Americans to vote for him. He won the game. But elections are not simple equations - they’re part of that wonderfully subjective and wacky world that is politics. If elections were about nothing but winning or not, we wouldn’t have but a fraction of the stupidity and chaos we have to put up with now.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                Funnily enough, anger is a strong motivating force for elections. Nothing gets people out to vote like being upset at something.
                Given that the last election that had a majority of eligible voters turn out was likely before you were born, either your supposition is baseless or the American people are happier every year.

                One side in politics is always angry, that is the way of politics. The only people upset these days seem to be liberals, who wouldn't vote for an honest candidate anyway, so their anger it pointless.

                Trump's base is pretty happy, and the bulk of Americans aren't even bothering to register to vote.
                Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                  Given that the last election that had a majority of eligible voters turn out was likely before you were born, either your supposition is baseless or the American people are happier every year.

                  One side in politics is always angry, that is the way of politics. The only people upset these days seem to be liberals, who wouldn't vote for an honest candidate anyway, so their anger it pointless.

                  Trump's base is pretty happy, and the bulk of Americans aren't even bothering to register to vote.
                  Except in Ca, where voter fraud is a epidemic. Gawd could you guys spare some Texas Rangers?

                  I'd really like it if the Feds came here and arrested every mayor and supervisor who supported sanctuary cities.

                  Under what law you might ask?
                  1907. Title 8, U.S.C. 1324(a) Offenses

                  Title 8, U.S.C. § 1324(a) defines several distinct offenses related to aliens. Subsection 1324(a)(1)(i)-(v) prohibits alien smuggling, domestic transportation of unauthorized aliens, concealing or harboring unauthorized aliens, encouraging or inducing unauthorized aliens to enter the United States, and engaging in a conspiracy or aiding and abetting any of the preceding acts. Subsection 1324(a)(2) prohibits bringing or attempting to bring unauthorized aliens to the United States in any manner whatsoever, even at a designated port of entry. Subsection 1324(a)(3).
                  Alien Smuggling -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(i) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing that a person is an alien, to bring to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever such person at a place other than a designated port of entry or place other than as designated by the Commissioner, regardless of whether such alien has received prior official authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States and regardless of any future official action which may be taken with respect to such alien.
                  Domestic Transporting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law.
                  Harboring -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation.
                  Encouraging/Inducing -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv) makes it an offense for any person who -- encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such coming to, entry, or residence is or will be in violation of law.
                  Conspiracy/Aiding or Abetting -- Subsection 1324(a)(1)(A)(v) expressly makes it an offense to engage in a conspiracy to commit or aid or abet the commission of the foregoing offenses.
                  Bringing Aliens to the United States -- Subsection 1324(a)(2) makes it an offense for any person who -- knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has not received prior authorization to come to, enter, or reside in the United States, to bring to or attempts to bring to the United States in any manner whatsoever, such alien, regardless of any official action which may later be taken with respect to such alien.
                  The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), enacted on September 30, 1996, added a new 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(3)(A) which makes it an offense for any person, during any 12-month period, to knowingly hire at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that these individuals are unauthorized aliens. See this Manual at 1908 (unlawful employment of aliens).
                  Unit of Prosecution -- With regard to offenses defined in subsections 1324(a)(1)(A)(i)-(v), (alien smuggling, domestic transporting, harboring, encouraging/inducing, or conspiracy/aiding or abetting) each alien with respect to whom a violation occurs constitutes a unit of prosecution. Prior to enactment of the IIRIRA, the unit of prosecution for violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2) was each transaction, regardless of the number of aliens involved. However, the unit of prosecution is now based on each alien in respect to whom a violation occurs.
                  Knowledge -- Prosecutions for alien smuggling, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(i) require proof that defendant knew that the person brought to the United States was an alien. With regard to the other violations in 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a), proof of knowledge or reckless disregard of alienage is sufficient.
                  Penalties -- The basic statutory maximum penalty for violating 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(i) and (v)(I) (alien smuggling and conspiracy) is a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both. With regard to violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(ii)-(iv) and (v)(ii), domestic transportation, harboring, encouraging/inducing, or aiding/abetting, the basic statutory maximum term of imprisonment is 5 years, unless the offense was committed for commercial advantage or private financial gain, in which case the maximum term of imprisonment is 10 years. In addition, significant enhanced penalties are provided for in violations of 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1) involving serious bodily injury or placing life in jeopardy. Moreover, if the violation results in the death of any person, the defendant may be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years. The basic penalty for a violation of subsection 1324(a)(2) is a fine under title 18, imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(A). Enhanced penalties are provided for violations involving bringing in criminal aliens, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(i), offenses done for commercial advantage or private financial gain, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii), and violations where the alien is not presented to an immigration officer immediately upon arrival, 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(iii). A mandatory minimum three year term of imprisonment applies to first or second violations of § 1324(a)(2)(B)(i) or (B)(ii). Further enhanced punishment is provided for third or subsequent offenses.


                  https://www.justice.gov/usam/crimina...1324a-offenses


                  It'd fix the political problems out here.
                  Credo quia absurdum.


                  Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                    Given that the last election that had a majority of eligible voters turn out was likely before you were born, either your supposition is baseless or the American people are happier every year.

                    One side in politics is always angry, that is the way of politics. The only people upset these days seem to be liberals, who wouldn't vote for an honest candidate anyway, so their anger it pointless.

                    Trump's base is pretty happy, and the bulk of Americans aren't even bothering to register to vote.
                    And funnily enough, we’ve had a cyclical series of presidents from different parties, not to mention the nature of the changing... eh, forget it. When someone starts off an argument by claiming that the impact of voter emotion and satisfaction on electoral results or voter turnout is a baseless supposition, there’s really not much I can say. Here you go, if you would like some reading on the subject. Or this could help. You could find better if you used Google for a few minutes but, to be honest, I’m still stunned you would find the concept of emotions like anger playing a role in voter choice doubtful.

                    Comment

                    Latest Topics

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X