Obamacare Passed Through voter Fraud

[OnTheRight]

I'm not drawing any conclusions until our resident expert, Truthmatters, gets here to give us her informed opinion on the matter.

Kind of like seeking an opinion on the latest in quantum physics theory from the burger flipper at the local McDonalds.

My informed opinion is that the Constitution gives each house of Congress the authority to determine the validity of the election that sends their respective members to that house. The Senate sat Franken - that means they've judged the result of the election as valid. Case closed.

Who is the Senate Majority leader again? Who was House Speaker then? You seem to have forgotten.....

 

[OnTheRight]

166 < 312 last I checked.

.

Another 66 are awaiting trial. "The numbers aren't greater," the authors say, "because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and 'knowingly' voted unlawfully." The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.

?


166 + 66 < 312

And?

and 1+1=2 except for Obozo supporters......

"The numbers aren't greater," the authors say, "because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and 'knowingly' voted unlawfully." The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.

 

[martybegan]

166 < 312 last I checked.

So voter fraud is OK in your book, as long as we can prove the margin of fraud is less than the margin of the election. Got it.

Sorry, not my book. Unless you're the one writing my book.

Is it that painful to concede a point that mashes with your worldview? Are you so dogmatically programmed that you have to make any mental excuse to stop yourself from agreeing with the party line?

What's the point? That voter fraud in Minnesota wasn't enough to alter the result of the election? OK. Got it. Thanks.

This is proven, court documented fraud, and they actually have evidence for about 900 more, but cannot prove it at this time. 50-60 more are being tried.

You are such a partisan hack. The only reason you dont care is that your side probably profited from the fraud. I guess the ends justify the means, and morality and law is trumped by political power.

I repeat. HACK.

 

[Leweman]

It's how dems win elections ... besides all the complicit media coverage.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I'm not drawing any conclusions until our resident expert, Truthmatters, gets here to give us her informed opinion on the matter.

Kind of like seeking an opinion on the latest in quantum physics theory from the burger flipper at the local McDonalds.

My informed opinion is that the Constitution gives each house of Congress the authority to determine the validity of the election that sends their respective members to that house. The Senate sat Franken - that means they've judged the result of the election as valid. Case closed.

Who is the Senate Majority leader again? Who was House Speaker then? You seem to have forgotten.....

I'm failing to see the relevance. Not a single senator from either side objected to Franken being seated.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

So voter fraud is OK in your book, as long as we can prove the margin of fraud is less than the margin of the election. Got it.

Sorry, not my book. Unless you're the one writing my book.

Is it that painful to concede a point that mashes with your worldview? Are you so dogmatically programmed that you have to make any mental excuse to stop yourself from agreeing with the party line?

What's the point? That voter fraud in Minnesota wasn't enough to alter the result of the election? OK. Got it. Thanks.

This is proven, court documented fraud, and they actually have evidence for about 900 more, but cannot prove it at this time. 50-60 more are being tried.

You are such a partisan hack. The only reason you dont care is that your side probably profited from the fraud. I guess the ends justify the means, and morality and law is trumped by political power.

I repeat. HACK.

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

 

[martybegan]

Sorry, not my book. Unless you're the one writing my book.


What's the point? That voter fraud in Minnesota wasn't enough to alter the result of the election? OK. Got it. Thanks.

This is proven, court documented fraud, and they actually have evidence for about 900 more, but cannot prove it at this time. 50-60 more are being tried.

You are such a partisan hack. The only reason you dont care is that your side probably profited from the fraud. I guess the ends justify the means, and morality and law is trumped by political power.

I repeat. HACK.

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

No, but you should care that there was fraud in an election to begin with. Doesnt it bother you that people who shouldnt be able to vote are actually voting? I guess because you think they vote like you do, its OK.

I ask a simple question. Do you support people voting when they do not have the right to?

 

[Leweman]

Sorry, not my book. Unless you're the one writing my book.


What's the point? That voter fraud in Minnesota wasn't enough to alter the result of the election? OK. Got it. Thanks.

This is proven, court documented fraud, and they actually have evidence for about 900 more, but cannot prove it at this time. 50-60 more are being tried.

You are such a partisan hack. The only reason you dont care is that your side probably profited from the fraud. I guess the ends justify the means, and morality and law is trumped by political power.

I repeat. HACK.

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

until they prove otherwise. come on oompa loompa, you know the drill. It's Harry Reid and the white house's strategy of guilty because they say so.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

This is proven, court documented fraud, and they actually have evidence for about 900 more, but cannot prove it at this time. 50-60 more are being tried.

You are such a partisan hack. The only reason you dont care is that your side probably profited from the fraud. I guess the ends justify the means, and morality and law is trumped by political power.

I repeat. HACK.

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

No, but you should care that there was fraud in an election to begin with. Doesnt it bother you that people who shouldnt be able to vote are actually voting?

Yes. How do you propose this form of fraud be stopped?

I guess because you think they vote like you do, its OK.

I ask a simple question. Do you support people voting when they do not have the right to?

No.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

This is proven, court documented fraud, and they actually have evidence for about 900 more, but cannot prove it at this time. 50-60 more are being tried.

You are such a partisan hack. The only reason you dont care is that your side probably profited from the fraud. I guess the ends justify the means, and morality and law is trumped by political power.

I repeat. HACK.

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

until they prove otherwise. come on oompa loompa, you know the drill. It's Harry Reid and the white house's strategy of guilty because they say so.

So now Harry Reid's statements mean Franken isn't the lawful Senator from Minnesota.

I've heard enough.

 

[Leweman]

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

until they prove otherwise. come on oompa loompa, you know the drill. It's Harry Reid and the white house's strategy of guilty because they say so.

So now Harry Reid's statements mean Franken isn't the lawful Senator from Minnesota.

I've heard enough.

No, his logic does though.

 

[g5000]

Minnesota Majority is not a non-partisan group. They are actively promoting Voter ID and oppose gay marriage, and the author of the OP article shills for them.

Here is an ad MM used to promote Voter ID which many found to be racist:

Note the black man in prison stripes and the stereotyped Mexican.


The OP article does not state whether or not the fraudulent voters were caught during the course of the contested Senate race, or after. It does not mention if their votes were counted toward Franken's election, or if they were caught during the course of the long court battles and thrown out before Franken was declared the winner.

The title of this thread is also incorrect since the article does not support the assertion that Franken lost the election after you subtract the number of convicted fraudsters.

...it doesn't require a leap to suggest there might one day be proof that Al Franken was elected on the strength of voter fraud.

Might. From a biased source.


Nevertheless, the findings are interesting when you consider how complex the process of Franken's election was, and the fact that we would not have ObamaCare were it not for his ascension to the Senate. He was ushered in by a whisker.

 

[martybegan]

? So we should just assume that 900 people are criminals without proof? What Constitution are you following?

No, but you should care that there was fraud in an election to begin with. Doesnt it bother you that people who shouldnt be able to vote are actually voting?

Yes. How do you propose this form of fraud be stopped?

I guess because you think they vote like you do, its OK.

I ask a simple question. Do you support people voting when they do not have the right to?

No.

By matching voter rolls to a know ID device such as a Driver's Liscence or State ID. Right now Dems fight every effort to clean out the rolls, because they know it helps them.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

until they prove otherwise. come on oompa loompa, you know the drill. It's Harry Reid and the white house's strategy of guilty because they say so.

So now Harry Reid's statements mean Franken isn't the lawful Senator from Minnesota.

I've heard enough.

No, his logic does though.

? OK - are you talking to me or to Harry Reid?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

No, but you should care that there was fraud in an election to begin with. Doesnt it bother you that people who shouldnt be able to vote are actually voting?

Yes. How do you propose this form of fraud be stopped?

I guess because you think they vote like you do, its OK.

I ask a simple question. Do you support people voting when they do not have the right to?

No.

By matching voter rolls to a know ID device such as a Driver's Liscence or State ID. Right now Dems fight every effort to clean out the rolls, because they know it helps them.

How does that stop felons from getting on the rolls? Wouldn't a felon's legally issued state ID match his own name? How did the felons in the 166 cases vote? Did they illegally register - or did they actually vote in place of another voter?

 

[Shelzin]

This is needed in the worst way.

David Bismark: E-voting without fraud | Video on TED.com

 

[Truthmatters]

At Least Barry H. Teleprompter can say he was the first to do that....


York: When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots | WashingtonExaminer.com

convictions are a matter of public record.

GO GET THE RECORDS!

 

[martybegan]

Yes. How do you propose this form of fraud be stopped?



No.

By matching voter rolls to a know ID device such as a Driver's Liscence or State ID. Right now Dems fight every effort to clean out the rolls, because they know it helps them.

How does that stop felons from getting on the rolls? Wouldn't a felons legally issues state ID match his own name?

It would provide a numbered document that could then be compared against the States bureau of prisons, would have the same numbered document on file.

Right now most voter rolls are by name and address, both of which can be duplicated or misunderstood rather easily, and in the case of address, can be transient.

Also, as I stated, every time a state tries to remove inelligble voters, or even search for them, the state democratic parties scream SUPPRESSION!!!, because they know certian classes of inellgible voters skew to them.

 

[Truthmatters]

Give us the convictions.

Lets see the names and cases.

Its public record go get it

 

[martybegan]

At Least Barry H. Teleprompter can say he was the first to do that....


York: When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots | WashingtonExaminer.com

convictions are a matter of public record.

GO GET THE RECORDS!

Yet every time someone tries to clean up the voter rolls using this information, people like you scream VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Just admit you like it when felons and illegals vote, because you know they vote like you.