Seriously??????? WHERE did I even mention much less quote FOX News???!!!
Are you trying to convince us that outfits like the 'Huffy' Post & NBC News are conservative outfits???
Puhleeeze...
You appear to be the one who resides in a fantasy world.
US Sanctuary Cities?
- Thread starter Al Wohlstrom
- Start date
Seriously??????? WHERE did I even mention much less quote FOX News???!!!
Are you trying to convince us that outfits like the 'Huffy' Post & NBC News are conservative outfits???
Puhleeeze...
You appear to be the one who resides in a fantasy world.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Do you really want me to get into a Craik-Lonesome Bob back and forth complete with charts on this debate? I will if you want, but don't bash me for doing it if I do.
Larry's sources are all opinion pieces, complete misstatements of fact or law, or just wrong.
The truth of the matter in the US is that voter fraud is an imperceptibly small problem.
If you want, I'll embarrass Larry once again for being duped by the right win media, but I'll only do it if you guys back off on criticizing me for doing so.
Larry's wrong, dead wrong, and perpetuating a myth designed to toughen voter registration laws when there is no problem. Why? No one will like the answer but it is true: the fewer poor, black and legal Latinos vote, the better the Republican party does. It's that simple.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
I'll give Larry an appetizer of the tidal wave of truth that is about to hit him, if Pete ok's it.
THis was a study of the BUSH ADMINISTRATION's Justice department on voter fraud:
WASHINGTON, April 11 — Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.
Enlarge This Image
Darren Hauck for The New York Times
Nashawna Prude, 9, with a family photo that includes her grandmother, Kimberly, second from left, , jailed for more than a year for voter fraud.
Multimedia
In the Courts
Graphic
In the Courts
Related
Panel Said to Alter Finding on Voter Fraud (April 11, 2007)
Enlarge This Image
Darren Hauck for The New York Times
Ms. Prude’s daughter Nicole with her children, Anthony Bibins, 4; Nashawna; and Narvelle Handley, 1, at home last week in Milwaukee.
Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year.
THis was a study of the BUSH ADMINISTRATION's Justice department on voter fraud:
WASHINGTON, April 11 — Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.
Enlarge This Image
Darren Hauck for The New York Times
Nashawna Prude, 9, with a family photo that includes her grandmother, Kimberly, second from left, , jailed for more than a year for voter fraud.
Multimedia
In the Courts
Graphic
In the Courts
Related
Panel Said to Alter Finding on Voter Fraud (April 11, 2007)
Enlarge This Image
Darren Hauck for The New York Times
Ms. Prude’s daughter Nicole with her children, Anthony Bibins, 4; Nashawna; and Narvelle Handley, 1, at home last week in Milwaukee.
Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year.
Pat
Supporter
So Bush really won the 2000 election????
Voter fraud is a blanket term coined by lawyers. It refers to fraudulent voting, identity fraud, perjury, voter registration fraud, forgery, and a variety of crimes related to the electoral process. Also defined as voter fraud, mechanisms involving intimidation at polls, so called "voter incentives" i.e. bribes, and improper vote counting. Remember that the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was passed with specific provisions to prevent voter fraud which was endemic back then. Activists somehow now want to limit the term to simply getting caught at the polling place voting illegally but the issue is much broader than that and far from "insignificant".
There is credible evidence that Mrs. Clinton was robbed of the Democrat Party nomination in 2008 by the actions of the Obama campaign. Hillary Backers Decry Massive Obama Vote Fraud
Revelations that illegal votes may have given Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) his 312-vote margin of victory in his 2008 Senate race—out of the nearly 3 million votes cast—gives one pause. The fact that 243 people have already been convicted or are awaiting trial on voter fraud underscores a persistent concern that, despite their small share of the vote, ineligible ballots can actually swing results. Non-citizen votes could have given 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.
Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler (R) unveiled a study in 2011 showing that almost 5,000 illegal aliens cast votes in the U.S. Senate election in that state in 2010.
In 1984, Brooklyn’s Democratic district attorney, Elizabeth Holtzman, released a state grand-jury report on a successful 14-year conspiracy that cast thousands of fraudulent votes in local, state, and congressional elections. Just like the DOI undercover operatives, the conspirators cast votes at precincts in the names of dead, moved, and bogus voters. The grand jury recommended voter ID, a basic election-integrity measure that New York has steadfastly refused to implement.
Research, performed by Old Dominion University professors Jesse Richman and David Earnest, was published in the Washington Post. The data comes from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES). Its large number of observations (32,800 in 2008 and 55,400 in 2010) provide sufficient samples of the non-immigrant sub-population, with 339 non-citizen respondents in 2008 and 489 in 2010. For the 2008 CCES, they also attempted to match respondents to voter files so that they could verify whether they actually voted. Their research found that more than 14 percent of non-citizens voted in either the 2008 or 2010 elections. The impact of those votes may have been quite large, the professors said.
Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), they found that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could also account for the margin by which Mr. Franken won his senate seat.
They also said illegal votes could have tipped North Carolina’s 2008 Presidential vote in favor of Barack Obama. Voter identification laws were identified as marginally effective in preventing this form of voter fraud, according to the research.
Ironically, they found one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted. Illegal registration is rarely challenged and once in the system, the verification of ID at the polls simply ratifies the illegal vote.
On April 6 2011 the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), that is, the organization itself as opposed to its employees, was convicted in Las Vegas of felony “compensation” for registration of voters. Nevada forbids compensating voter registration canvassers because it creates a financial incentive for fraudulent or sloppy registrations.
The conviction came after the 2008 election cycle during which Las Vegas ACORN officials emptied the local jails to fill voter registration canvasser slots and even put individuals convicted of identity theft in charge of the registration drive. At least they hired experts, some locals quipped, according to John Fund of the Wall Street Journal.
Mickey Mouse, Mary Poppins and celebrities living and dead have been registered to vote over and over again precisely because ACORN has been allowed to get away with polluting the nation’s voter rolls for so long. At least 54 ACORN employees and individuals associated with ACORN have been convicted of voter fraud.
Last edited:
Charlie Farley
Supporter
That's funny, long live democracy...not
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
O.K. Everyone got hung up on the politics, and ignored the second part of my question.
Are the Mayors and councillor's of those cities giving sanctuary to illegals breaking the law?
Are the Mayors and councillor's of those cities giving sanctuary to illegals breaking the law?
By disregarding Federal law, yes they are.
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
It's not that simple.
Pete, in the US, the federal government handles all immigration and deportation issues. The states and cities do not.
It used to be that any offense commited by an illegal that involved more than 5 years of jail time was an immediately deportable offense.
The law changed in 1996 to basically any offense.
The question is whether state and local law enforcement that say pull over a person for speeding are REQUIRED to report that to the feds, and thus result in an immediate deportation.
It's a fine line, but the law is that states and locals can ban this reporting, so the cities and localities that are "sanctuary cities" simply direct their officers not to ask people their immigration status if stopped.
The "why" of this is what I (and others) listed above. YOu'd basically be deporting the entire manual labor work force in some places if you did this.
Pete, in the US, the federal government handles all immigration and deportation issues. The states and cities do not.
It used to be that any offense commited by an illegal that involved more than 5 years of jail time was an immediately deportable offense.
The law changed in 1996 to basically any offense.
The question is whether state and local law enforcement that say pull over a person for speeding are REQUIRED to report that to the feds, and thus result in an immediate deportation.
It's a fine line, but the law is that states and locals can ban this reporting, so the cities and localities that are "sanctuary cities" simply direct their officers not to ask people their immigration status if stopped.
The "why" of this is what I (and others) listed above. YOu'd basically be deporting the entire manual labor work force in some places if you did this.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Thanks.
Pat
Supporter
Cynics might suggest that the courting of the Latino vote by both parties has led to a greater support for illegal immigrants/undocumented workers/unregistered democrat voters with enactment of things such as sanctuary cities, in-state tuition for non-citizens and other outreach programs.
Seriously, I don't think the current uproar and core concerns are with the yard guy your neighbor uses or the housekeeper at a local motel. Department of Homeland Security records show that in just one eight-month period in 2014, more than 8,100 deportable aliens were released by sanctuary jurisdictions. Three thousand of them were felons and 62 percent had a prior criminal record. Nineteen hundred were later rearrested a total of 4,300 times on 7,500 different offenses.
As evidenced by the tragic murder of 32-year-old Kathryn Steinle at a San Francisco waterfront pier by a multiple convicted felon and deportee a Mr. Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez. Given Mr. Sanchez' criminal history, It would suggest his contribution to the labor force consisted primarily of undocumented pharmaceutical sales.
The problem goes far beyond "don't ask, don't tell" someone's legal status. In this case the local officials defied a Immigration and Customs Enforcement issued "detainer" on the alleged assailant Mr. Sanchez which requested the sheriff's office hold him for an extra 48 hours if they decide to release him. San Francisco district attorney's office also decided to drop the case because it is old and minor. In 1989, San Francisco passed the "City of Refuge" Ordinance (Sanctuary Ordinance) which "prohibits City employees from helping Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with immigration investigations or arrests unless such help is required by federal or state law or a warrant." Since there was no warrant, the Sanctuary Ordinance requires the refusal to honor the ICE detainer that was placed on Mr. Sanchez. San Francisco Sheriff Mirkarimi claimed he was following his city's 'sanctuary city" policies when he released the five time deported, seven time convicted felon from custody no doubt to add further contribution to the Bay Area labor force.
I'm also not sure what portion of the five federal deportation orders executed on Mr. Sanchez supports the City of San Francisco's giving him sanctuary and obstructing him from being deported a sixth time.
If the over 134,000 aliens released by the administration in just the past two years follow the pattern of those aliens studied by the GAO in 2005, they will commit hundreds of thousands of more crimes, victimizing countless innocent Americans in crimes that could have been prevented. Perhaps that's not a good thing.
I wonder if Mr. Sanchez is registered to vote...
Last edited:
There are also laws about hiring undocumented illegal aliens. All this can be shrouded in labor and the "American Dream", but it's still boils down to getting in and staying in political office. Why do you suppose the current administration is turning a blind eye to this? They sure as hell got all over Arizona about the illegals.
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Where's Jim when you need him, dammit? We need some graphs here. Right away. We're all suffering from hypographia.
Which is just as well, because America is not a Democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic...
In 1986 I found myself in the unusual position of hiring American workers and having them prove they had the right to work in the USA after the Feds changed the law (could have been 86/87/88 thinking about it). Prior to this time it was not a Federal offence to employ an illegal alien.
So, what's unusual about that, I hear you ask?
I myself, was an illegal alien with no legal right to work in the USA, but I got away with it for 6 years. Never voted though...:laugh:
So, what's unusual about that, I hear you ask?
I myself, was an illegal alien with no legal right to work in the USA, but I got away with it for 6 years. Never voted though...:laugh:
Keith, you know more about the US than most people that vote here. Probably 7 out of 10 would say we are a democracy.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
How is it possible for an illegal to vote? I'm obviously missing something.
'Loopholes like no photo I.D. (or proof of citizenship either if I remember right) being required at the polls in California, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming, or Washington, D.C. ...a NON-photo I.D. in effect in Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and Washington St...and a strict non-photo I.D. in effect in Arizona, North Dakota, and Ohio....according to the latest tallies I could find. There are schemes involving mail-in ballots, too.
What could possibly go wrong??? :shrug:
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Thanks for filling that gap in my education, Larry. As you say "what could possibly go wrong".
And Jeff with this lack of having to show I.D. How could any investigator say voting fraud is negligible ?
And Jeff with this lack of having to show I.D. How could any investigator say voting fraud is negligible ?
"States generally are not permitted by HAVA (Help Americans Vote Act) to process voter registration applications unless they contain a driver’s license number and/or at least the last four digits of his or her social security number. If an applicant states that he or she has neither of these numbers, then the state must assign him or her a unique identification number and process the application. Nonetheless, if an applicant has one of these numbers and simply refuses to provide it, then the state may not process his or her application."
