USA Politics.

Discuss political news items / current events.
Post Reply
User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

Although Monica Lewinsky and Hillary Clinton have had a past littered with scandal, Monica has openly admitted that she will be voting for for Hillary.

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

Louisiana Senate Debate Tonight on CSPAN at 7pm-8pm CT
or Live Stream on the web by clicking either of these links.
http://www.wafb.com/story/33592654/happ ... te-tonight" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
or
http://www.kplctv.com/story/33591367/wa ... ate-debate" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: USA Politics.

Post by skmo »

It seems to me that this would be kind of like hearing the owner of a for-profit addiction recovery center building a bar right next door.
Think.jpg
Think.jpg (80.06 KiB) Viewed 4399 times

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: USA Politics.

Post by skmo »

Yes, leftists really are that stupid.
vetting.jpg
vetting.jpg (53.43 KiB) Viewed 4398 times

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: USA Politics.

Post by skmo »

Joel wrote:
:In mockery of others' words:

But, but, David Duke is a Doctor!

Yeah, so was Jack the Ripper and Che.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

UK: Clinton Foundation and IS funded from the same sources - Assange

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

http://libertyunyielding.com/2016/11/01 ... -violence/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The Obama administration has repeatedly turned a blind eye to racial discrimination and harassment when the victims are white. One recent example is its indifference to discrimination by racist left-wing protesters at the University of California at Berkeley. Their misconduct was captured on video on October 21, and nationally publicized by the Washington Times, Reason Magazine, Fox News, and the Daily Caller.

As the Daily Caller noted:
A video of Friday’s protest shows a large group of protesters preventing white students from passing over a bridge while allowing access to students of color. In addition to blocking access to Berkeley’s Sather Gate, a key bridge on the route to many classes, the wall of protesters also prevented white students from studying in the Student Union and stopped traffic at the main intersection in the front of campus.

As Fox News observed, the protesters were “harassing white students trying to study, barring their path across a key bridge while allowing students of color safe passage. The protest, which began last Friday, blocked Berkeley’s Sather Gate, disrupted studying students in the Student Union.”
Berkeley did nothing about this, even though campus police were right nearby when it happened. The Obama administration also said nothing about this, even though it has often taken note of far more trivial racial matters that offend minority protesters, such as Halloween costumes that protesters claim “appropriate” non-white cultures.
Yale protesters demanded the removal of a lecturer who defended harmless Halloween costumes such as a “blonde ­haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day.” The protesters also childishly “spat on” people attending a free-speech conference. Yet, “White House press secretary Josh Earnest . . . praised the protesters.”

When white fraternity members at the University of Oklahoma were caught on video engaged in a vile racist chant, and were expelled by University President David Boren, “the White House responded” within less than a day, “praising David Boren’s actions.” It did so, even though civil-libertarians and law professors such as Eugene Volokh, Glenn Reynolds, and Erwin Chemerinsky concluded that the chant was protected by the First Amendment, and even though the chant occurred off campus and thus did not constitute illegal racial harassment under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. Federal courts have ruled that off-campus conduct does not violate laws against harassment on campus, such as Title VI’s sister statute Title IX, in cases such as Roe v. Saint Louis University (2014).

Yet the Obama administration has been completely silent about the racial harassment against whites at Berkeley, even though Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits harassment that results in students being “excluded from participation in” any campus “program or activity,” and holds colleges liable for being deliberately indifferent to such harassment (as Berkeley has in fact been). Even if no one has complained to the government about this harassment, this is not an excuse for the Obama administration to ignore it.

If the harassment were aimed at minorities, the Obama administration would not only denounce it, but might even begin investigating the college at which it occurred.

The Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights sometimes investigates harassment on campus based on press reports. For example, it found Michigan State University liable under Title IX for not investigating a sexual assault case faster after it learned about a criminal complaint alleging sexual assault from a news story. The Obama administration investigated Michigan State, even though local prosecutors declined to prosecute based on the absence of evidence. It turned out after investigation that the sexual-assault claim was false. OCR perversely faulted Michigan State for not investigating the false complaint fast enough, even though the complainant didn’t want a college investigation at all (only a criminal investigation). OCR also suggested the University might have to offer the false accuser academic “remedies.”

The Obama administration’s silence about what happened at Berkeley is not excused by the fact that the victims of the harassment were white. Racial harassment can violate federal civil rights laws, even when the victims are white. A unanimous Supreme Court ruling in McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Company (1976), held that all races — including whites – are covered by the civil-rights laws and constitutional guarantees of equal protection. That ruling, which allowed white employees to challenge their race-based firing, was authored by the Supreme Court’s first black justice, Thurgood Marshall. Civil rights laws forbid racial harassment and violence aimed at whites. For example, federal appeals courts have ruled that employers are liable for racial harassment they allow minorities to commit against whites, in cases like Bowen v. Missouri Department of Social Services (2002) and Huckabay v. Moore (1998).

Nor is there a “diversity” excuse for racial or sexual harassment. For example, a judge refused to dismiss a discriminatory harassment lawsuit brought by white men who were subject to an insulting 3-day “diversity training” seminar, in Hartman v. Pena (1995).
The Obama administration has an egregious double standard about hate crimes and racial violence against whites. When the victim is black or Hispanic, they prosecute the alleged offender. When the victim is white, they don’t. This violates constitutional equal-protection guarantees.
As a former Justice Department civil-rights lawyer observed, the Criminal Section of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has consistently done nothing when the victim of a hate crime is white:

when the victims of racial violence are white, nothing happens.

When a mob of blacks savagely attacked random whites at the Wisconsin State Fair earlier this summer, the Section did nothing. When a similar riot occurred at the Iowa State Fair in August 2010 — where bands of black teens organized a “beat whitey night” — the Section once again did nothing. Last month, still another flash mob of blacks beating whites took place in Philadelphia, yet the Section did nothing. The same is true near Pittsburgh and in Ohio … there is a pervasive hostility in this administration to bringing cases on behalf of white victims.
By contrast, if the victim is non-white — like an undocumented immigrant from Mexico attacked in Pennsylvania — the Justice Department prosecutes; in the Pennsylvania case it obtained guilty verdicts in federal court against two white teenagers who had previously been found not guilty of hate crimes and most other charges in Pennsylvania state court.
The Obama administration’s race-based double standard is itself the result of a disturbingly politicized Justice Department, which hires lawyers based on ideology, rather than competence. For example, the Obama Justice Department hired 113 overtly liberal lawyers and absolutely zero non-political or non-liberal lawyers for 113 positions in a branch of its Civil Rights Division."

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: USA Politics.

Post by skmo »

Elizabeth wrote:Although Monica Lewinsky and Hillary Clinton have had a past littered with scandal, Monica has openly admitted that she will be voting for for Hillary.
attachment.jpg
attachment.jpg (36.22 KiB) Viewed 4286 times


User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

http://www.americanlibertyreport.com/ar ... rge-soros/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Of all of the nefarious schemes and stunts with the potential to change the outcome of the upcoming presidential election, perhaps none is so threatening or consequential as the possibility that electronic voting machines in as many as 15 states could be rigged to ensure that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is the winner.
Many of the machines in question are made by a private company called Smartmatic Corporation, a company that claims to be based in the United Kingdom but is controlled through holding companies in Venezuela, Barbados and the Netherlands.
The founders of the company are Venezuelan, which is not a coincidence, given that the machines were used in a number of massive landslide elections in that country when President Hugo Chavez was reelected in that country in the 2000s.
Smartmatic first came to prominence when its machines (many of which were then retrofitted gambling devices) were used in a referendum held in the South American country in 2004.
Smartmatic machines work by tabulating results independently and then communicating those results to a central server via encrypted messages.
In the wake of the referendum, independent monitors claimed widespread fraud, and peer-reviewed articles in academic journals stated that it was likely fraud had indeed taken place and that it was possible that this fraud had been committed by remote control.
Despite these accusations, international election monitors from the European Union and the Organization of American States (OAS) disagreed with these same independent analysts, and the government allowed the result (the administration of President Chavez staying in office) to stand.
Smartmatic then won a multimillion-dollar contract with the Venezuelan government that saw its machines tabulate huge victories for the Socialist leader before his death from cancer in 2013.
Smartmatic was officially incorporated in 2000 in Delaware in the U.S., and after 2004, its voting machines were used in a number of controversial leadership races in Brazil (in the election of now ousted [and corrupt] President Dilma Rousseff), Mexico (in the election of highly unpopular president Enrique Peña Nieto), Argentina (in the election of corruption-tinged President Christina Fernández de Kirchner) and the Philippines (in the election of controversial new President Rodrigo Duterte).
It should be noted that one of Smartmatic’s first deployments in the United States was in Cook County, the home of Barack Obama when he was a Senator from Illinois. In March 2006, it was discovered that a problem existed with the Smartmatic software that transferred the results. Things got so bad that one local alderman called the affair an “international conspiracy.” Despite this, the state of Illinois continued to use the machines.
In the 2016 general U.S. election, Smartmatic’s machines potentially could be used in parts of Illinois, Wisconsin, Washington, Oregon, New Jersey, Missouri, Louisiana, California, the District of Columbia, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Michigan, Florida, Colorado and Arizona. These latter seven states are crucial because they’re swing states that will significantly affect the electoral college totals for each presidential candidate.
Smartmatic’s website notes that some 57,000 of its machines have been deployed in past U.S. elections between 2006 and 2015, registering the vote of as many as 35 million citizens in 307 counties.
Prior to 2006, a predecessor company, Sequoia Voting Systems, had its machines used in U.S. elections, and in 2005, Smartmatic acquired Sequoia and then sold it to a group of investors two years later after endowing the firm’s machines with much of Smartmatic’s technology.
Whether Sequoia’s investors also are owners of Smartmatic is unknown; however, court documents released in 2008 confirmed that Smartmatic still had a significant financial interest in Sequoia. In fact, the CEO and President of Sequoia is a former Smartmatic executive, Jack Blaine, and there is significant shared intellectual property between the companies.
According to Wikipedia, after 2005, “Smartmatic assigned a major portion of its development and managerial teams, dedicated to revamping some of Sequoia’s old-fashioned, legacy voting machines, and replacing their technology with avant-garde proprietary features and developments, which resulted in new, high-tech products.”
Wikipedia reports that Sequoia’s older machines were responsible for the “hanging chad” problems in the state of Florida in the contested presidential election of 2000 and that one Sequoia worker speculated that this was done on purpose — “the object was to discredit punch-card ballots and thus promote sales of electronic voting machines,” he stated.
The same article relates that the sale of Sequoia was mandated by the American government’s Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. (CFIUS) because the owners of Smartmatic weren’t U.S. citizens.
Much of the controversy in this story comes from the ties that Smartmatic has to secretive billionaire financier and deep-pocketed Democratic donor George Soros. Since this story broke, Smartmatic’s website has been updated to read, “George Soros does not have and has never had any ownership stake in Smartmatic.”
However, the website goes on to say that “It is no secret that our Chairman, Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, is a member of a number of non-profit boards addressing global issues from poverty reduction to conflict resolution, including the Global Board of [George Soros’] Open Society Foundation… Lord Malloch-Brown is a highly respected global figure whose credentials include former Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations and former Vice-Chairman of the World Economic Forum.”
Soros is a regular speaker at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, and the conclave is known as one of the premier gatherings of globalist financiers and politicians in the world. Though Soros may not have a direct interest in Smartmatic, the admission that there is a connection to the company’s chairman, a member of British nobility, and to the WEF should be very telling.
Whether Soros has any connection to Sequoia currently is unknown, but why a British lord who has ties to Soros has any interest in voting machines that have been used in American elections should be highly disturbing unto itself.
While Soros’ name may not be familiar to all Americans, his fingerprints are all over the efforts of the Democratic Party in the 2016 election season. Not only has Soros personally and robustly contributed to Hillary Clinton PACs (political action committees) and Super-PACs, but he’s funded “social justice warrior” movements such as Black Lives Matter and Millennial Activists United to the tune of millions of dollars.
In this election, Soros is attempting to sway huge numbers of overseas voters for Clinton through the activist Avaaz organization, which he heavily supports. In 2008, Canadian minister of Transport John Baird called Avaaz a “shadowy foreign organization.”
Like many billionaires, Soros’ spending is not necessarily related to his partisan political feelings or leanings. Instead, Soros has his sights set on the almighty dollar. For decades, Soros’ Open Society Foundations has funded all manner of liberal, progressive and even Socialist causes that have driven deep cultural divisions into U.S. and world populations.
Soros has openly admitted creating and backing revolutionary political groups in Ukraine, Russia, Croatia, Slovakia and the former Yugoslavia. Most of these groups have or had as their stated goals the destabilization and regime change of the countries in which they are or were based.
Many of Soros’ investments are linked to funds or financial vehicles that benefit from such destabilization or even collapse of these countries, and the U.S. is no different for Soros. In the world of finance, this is called “disaster capitalism,” and Soros is probably one of the world’s leading practitioners of it.
In 1992, Soros famously made a billion dollars in one day by betting against the British pound, driving down the price and “breaking” the Bank of England’s control over the currency. Soros was blasted during Congressional testimony for his part in the collapse of the Russian economy in the 1990s through his control over economic advisors to Russian president Boris Yeltsin.
Numerous privatized Russian assets made their way into Soros’ personal portfolio. Jim Leach, then chairman of the House Banking Committee, called Soros’ dealings “one of the greatest social robberies in human history.”
In November 2003, the resignation of Georgian president Eduard Shevardnadze was blamed on anti-government activists funded by Soros. Later, two former executive directors of Soros’ foundation assumed influential roles in the new Georgian government. Of the events that Fall, Soros said, “I’m delighted by what happened in Georgia, and I take great pride in having contributed to it.”
For Soros, the world’s political fortunes are just an economic domino game, one that he can effect by applying pressure in the right places. Whereas many investors are content to let politicians make the decisions that will determine political outcomes, Soros is attempting to play puppet master by directing the politicians himself.
If national governments fall or unpopular leaders are elected, it makes no difference to Soros; he’s only concerned with the monetary outcome.
In speaking about Soros, New York Times economist Paul Krugman said, “[N]obody who has read a business magazine in the last few years can be unaware that these days there really are investors who not only move money in anticipation of a currency crisis, but actually do their best to trigger that crisis for fun and profit.”
In this way, like billionaires the Rockefellers or the Rothschilds, Soros is an unabashed globalist. From his palatial estate in Bedford Hills, New York, the 86-year-old financier and hedge-fund pioneer is pulling strings and making calls in the 2016 election like no other billionaire on the planet.
The list of organizations financed by Soros is vast and covers groups that promote socialism, drug legalization, UN control of the U.S., abortion rights, radical environmentalism, defense of major terrorist suspects, anti-religion, mass immigration, open borders, amnesty for illegal aliens, socialized medicine (including Obamacare), unilateral American disarmament, and the list goes on. As you can see, Soros’ destabilization agenda is quite transparent from even a cursory perusal of this list.
If Soros does indeed have influence over Smartmatic and/or Sequoia, his potential meddling in the U.S. election would be devastating and final, creating an electoral advantage for Hillary Clinton that would be completely impossible for GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump to overcome.
From there, his longtime (since 1992) connections to the Clintons would pay off handsomely as the Clintons are loath to forget any of their billionaire donors, especially globalist heavyweights like Soros.
Many of Clinton’s already-announced policies would drive Soros’ goals forward, such as a no-fly zone in Syria, which would exacerbate tensions or even cause war with Russia, the extension of Obamacare, further opening of the U.S.’s borders and weakening of its national defenses and military.
“[We] need people like George Soros,” Clinton said at a “Take Back America” conference, “who is fearless, and willing to step up [financially] when it counts.”
As for Smartmatic, the company hastily added to its website in October that “Smartmatic will not be deploying its technology in any U.S. county for the upcoming 2016 U.S. Presidential elections.”

However, voters should double-check that this will actually be the case when they go to vote — it’s hard to believe that states contracted to use their machines for the election would switch them out in the last two weeks before the vote.
Voters should also check to see if machines they’ll be using have the Sequoia mark on them, as the technology inside those machines may be very similar or even identical. Given the strong connection between Smartmatic and Sequoia, the minor differences between the branding on the machines could be a mere detail.
Look for the name and logo of Smartmatic and Sequoia on the back of any voting machine you use. If it has one of these marks immediately ask an election official for a paper ballot instead of trusting your vote to one of these machines.
At this late date, it may be too late to void any of the potential interference in the election on the part of George Soros. But in the aftermath, it would pay great dividends for conservatives to discover the true connections of his network as regards the vote and electronic voting machines."

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

The USA Voting system is a joke.

http://patriotupdate.com/obama-makes-ca ... gals-vote/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"In one of the most bizarre moves of the liberals’ desperate election plans, President Obama has now encouraged illegal immigrants to vote.

The moment came in a recent stump speech as a surrogate for Hillary Clinton, with Obama literally telling illegal aliens that our immigration forces will not be able to track them down and deport them if they vote. Beyond explaining that they could vote with no harm coming to them or their families, Obama then doubled down, stating that they “contribute” to the country and that voting was a-okay for them.

This is an absolutely appalling and pathetic development for the democrats, who have decided to forego dignity in these last days before Tuesday’s election."

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

"On Election Day in 2000, Republican Bill Federer was challenging then-House minority leader and former presidential candidate Dick Gephardt for his seat in a district encompassing the south side of St. Louis, the city’s southern suburbs and a rural county on the Mississippi River.
Meanwhile, the presidential race between Al Gore and George W. Bush was coming down to the wire with Missouri’s 11 electoral votes up for grabs.
The night before the election, Democratic Rep. William Clay told a Gore-Lieberman rally that a lawsuit would be filed to force the polls in St. Louis to stay open to ensure minorities could vote. Sure enough, on Election Day, Democrats in St. Louis sued to keep the polls open another three hours in a heavily Democratic-voting area.
The lawsuit was filed in the name of a “Robert D. Odom,” who, according to the complaint, “has not been able to vote and fears he will not be able to vote because of crowding at his polling place.”
Chaos ensued at the polling sites, Federer recalled, with thousands lining up around blocks as Gore and Jesse Jackson urged residents of St. Louis to go out and vote because the polls would remain open.
Republican attorneys later discovered Odom had died a year earlier.
The revelations of corruption in the 2016 election campaign are featured in the latest edition of WND’s monthly news magazine Whistleblower
Democrats insisted the plaintiff was meant to be Robert M. Odom, an aide to a Democratic candidate for Congress. But that Odom had voted, without any problem, before the lawsuit was filed.
Missouri Secretary of State Matt Blunt found more than 1,000 illegally cast ballots, but Federer told WND that with overwhelmed and understaffed poll sites handling a massive influx of voters, there’s no telling how many illegal ballots were cast after the normal polling hours.
Democrats vowed to look into the allegations of massive voter fraud, Federer noted, but the issue gradually faded from the news and eventually was forgotten.
“Anything that can cause confusion is a smokescreen for voter fraud,” he told WND ahead of this Tuesday’s Election Day. “Once they throw out the structure of when the polling ends, then they can do the voter fraud and then claim that it was in the confusion.”
In his previous race against Gephardt, in 1998, it was discovered that the St. Louis Board of Elections had left Federer’s name off the ballot in five St. Louis wards. In that election, too, the Democrats’ sued to keep the polls open beyond the legal closing time, inviting more opportunity for fraud, Federer said.
While Gephardt had securely held his seat since 1985, in 2000 he had been forced to spend the most money ever on his re-election, $6 million, twice as much as he spent against Federer in the 1998 election and the most ever spent in a congressional race in the state of Missouri. It was the third most expensive race in the nation that year.
A week before the 2000 election, Federer ended up on the front page of the St. Louis Dispatch after a man who put a video camera in Federer’s face at a parade filed assault charges against Federer. Federer says the man manipulated the camera to make it appear as if there was a struggle.
At the trial after the election, the cameraman, James Larrew, took the stand and admitted, however, that he received a paycheck from the U.S. Treasury and was on Gephardt’s staff.
Larrew confessed that he was following Federer around with the camera at the campaign event at the instruction of Joyce Aboussie, Gephardt’s top aide, who served as his national political director, among other roles.
The very week that the truth was revealed, Federer recalled, Gephardt announced he would not seek re-election.
“It took the jury 20 minutes to find out I was innocent, and he knew that would be our main campaign issue: ‘Using federal funds for campaign purposes. Gephardt needs to be in jail.'”
Federer noted other incidents he describes as examples of intimidation and smears against him in the campaigns he ran against Gephardt.
Gephardt’s opposition research discovered that Federer’s book “America’s God and Country: Encyclopedia of Quotations” was listed for sale, among hundreds of books, on the website of a Montana militia group.
Federer said he had no knowledge of the group, but a campaign television ad came out declaring, “Federer supplies books to Montana militia.”
The ad concluded ominously, “Bill Federer, too extreme for Missouri.”
Helping hands
Federer told WND an inner-city organizer came to his campaign headquarters and informed the candidate he could get “a whole lot of votes” from the city of St. Louis for you, noting that the Democrats will pay $20 per vote.
“I had to break it to him that we don’t pay for votes,” Federer said.
With dismay on his face, the man replied, “Really? Because I want to help you. I really like you.”
After the 2000 election, Federer worked with the late Phyllis Schlafly to compile other cases of vote and campaign fraud submitted by members of her Eagle Forum.
Incidents include:

• A St. Louis woman visited her Alzheimers-stricken mother at a care facility and discovered that he mother had voted. When she asked staff at the facility how her mother knew who to vote for, the woman was told that election workers “helped” her. The woman pointed out that her mother barely recognized her anymore.
• The NAACP offered $5 and a pack of cigarettes to minorities if they would vote Democrat.
• A blind lady named Ethel said she had received a call on election evening from someone asking if she would vote Democrat. She responded that she had already voted and had chosen a Republican slate. The person asked if she would like to vote again, and this time vote for the “right” candidates. She was told someone could pick her up and take her downtown to the Board of Election office and she could simply say her name wasn’t on the list at her precinct. Ethel refused, insisting that would be wrong.
• Individuals claiming to be from the NAACP were knocking on doors with lists of every registered voter at the residence, urging people to vote Democrat, because Bush “murdered one of our brothers in Texas” and offering rides to vote downtown after hours.
• At one polling place in a minority populated area of the city, the election official who was handing people their ballots told voters that if they punched the Republican hole it would void the ballot.
• In Jefferson County, Missouri, a lady voted and went to put her card into the sealed ballot box, but before she could drop it in, the election official took it from her, saying that there were too many ballots in the box. The lady left but felt concerned, so she went back inside. She said she saw the election official putting the ballots in a stack next to the box.
• The electricity went off in the Jefferson County Clerk’s office three times while ballots were being counted. When the electricity came back on and the computers were booted back up, the vote count was in favor of Democrats.

“Our government was designed for honest people, that both sides would protect the sacredness of a vote,” Federer told WND.
“But once you get rid of morals, you have this Machiavellian attitude of ‘I’m convinced that my agenda is so good, that any means necessary to accomplish it is justified,” he said.
“And once you get enough people with that frame of mind, the system itself is vulnerable to falling apart.”
Republicans are not immune to fraud, Federer said, referring to allegations that the party delayed polling results in the Iowa Caucuses in 2012 to prevent Rick Santorum from getting a boost against Mitt Romney, the eventual presidential nominee.
Democrats have dismissed charges of systematic voter fraud as myth, insisting it’s not feasible to engineer fraud in a way that would decide an election.
But Federer noted that at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July he ran into former Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod, who had concluded that a mere 600,000 swing voters in a handful of places across the nation could decide a presidential election.
Hans Von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow and manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at the Heritage Foundation, has maintained that there’s enough voter fraud to make a difference in a close election. His think tank has compiled 430 cases of voter fraud that resulted in a conviction or a judge ordering a new election.
Several cases have arisen in just the past week, along with the revelations by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, which captured on hidden camera a top Democratic operative engineering wide-scale vote fraud.
Last Thursday in Pennsylvania, a state the Donald Trump campaign believes it can win, state police raided two offices of a voter registration group in Philadelphia after raiding another office in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, just days earlier.
The Philadelphia Inquirer reported police used a warrant seeking forms that could be used to “construct fraudulent voter registration forms” and “completed voter registration forms containing same or similar identifying information of individuals on multiple forms.”
In Chicago, where the Democratic “machine” is believed to have come up with 8,858 votes from Chicago graveyards and elsewhere to steal the 1960 presidential election from Richard Nixon, CBS Local Chicago reported 119 dead people have voted 229 times in the last decade, with one dead man voting 11 times.
State officials in Texas are investigating reports of a “vote harvesting” scheme in which as many as 20,000 ballots has been filled in and delivered for people in Tarrant County.
In San Pedro, California, on Saturday, FoxNews.com reported, Jerry Mosna found 83 unused election ballots – all addressed to different people – stacked on the mailbox of an elderly neighbor who lives in a two-bedroom apartment.
“I think this is spooky,” he said. “All the different names, none we recognize, all at one address.”
A watchdog group, the Virginia Voters Alliance,” Lifezette reported, charges Virginia’s printing of an unprecedented 1 million provisional ballots for Tuesday’s election could allow a large number of previously disqualified felons to cast ballots for president in the potentially crucial swing state.
Reagan George, the group’s president, said the claim that the massive number of provisional ballots is for contingency planning is “bogus,” noting that in Fairfax County, for example, while only 2,500 provisional ballots were used in 2012, the county received more than 265,000.”
“This is ridiculous,” George said."

http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/candidate-sh ... ZXkL56H.99" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

http://www.americanlibertyreport.com/ar ... -election/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"For supporters of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, the prospect of a rigged election is the capstone to an incredibly challenging campaign season that’s featured dirty tricks, scandals, smears and surprises that have shocked even veteran political observers such as Roger Stone and Pat Caddell.
The depths to which the campaign of Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton has been willing to stoop appear to be getting lower every day. WikiLeaks has published hacked emails that have revealed devastatingly foul play not just from Hillary while she was Secretary of State, but also from her staffers as well as her campaign manager John Podesta.
Combine that with and the FBI’s ongoing investigation of Clinton’s private email server and reports about all the illicit activities of the Clinton Foundation, it would seem like there’s no way under ordinary circumstances Clinton could limp to a popular or electoral victory if this was an ordinary presidential race.
But it’s not; this contest has been a race like no other, and there are some very heavy hitters supporting the opposition, making it very lopsided (from a money and media perspective) in Clinton’s favor at this point.
One of the most feared and influential of Hillary Clinton’s donors is billionaire financier George Soros, and his eagerness to meddle in this election hasn’t met any bounds thus far. One of the most insidious ways Soros and the Democrats appear to be ready to beat a path to victory at all costs is with rigged voting machines.
Voting machines bearing the names of Smartmatic and Sequoia Voting Systems have ties to Soros and his Open Society Foundations, which are deeply entrenched in advancing a globalist, economically disruptive agenda.
There are also stories about other machines bearing the names of Election Systems & Software (ES&S) and Diebold possibly being rigged or being rig-able. For years, experts and analysts have pointed out connections between companies selling voting machines and campaigns of various political candidates, but because of the importance of this election, those connections need to be scrutinized more than ever.
When Donald Trump claims that the election is “rigged,” he’s without a doubt telling the truth — there is ample evidence that at a minimum, many of these machines are sold by companies based in countries and owned by entities outside the United States.
In the worst cases, these companies may have connections to Marxist or Socialist governments and/or financiers such as Soros or others, who seek to disrupt the global economy for financial gain. Anyone who has a vested interest in politics at all should not be in the business of manufacturing voting machines.
And certainly, electronic voting machines do not have a valid place in today’s politics; any such network of machines where results are tabulated on a remote computer with no paper trail being offered is practically begging to be “cracked” or “backdoored” in favor of whichever group or political party that’s willing to pay the price for such a fraud.
If you don’t think this can happen in the United States — think again. If you don’t believe the statements in this article are true, do your own research; most of the facts are easily available via Google.
Now that information about these systems and machines is coming to light, it’s beginning to dawn on voters that their votes — depending on where and how they’re cast — may be marginalized, negated, reversed or simply not counted at all if processed using one of these rigged machines and/or networks.
When Donald Trump spoke of possibly not accepting the results of the election, dependent on its outcome, he was absolutely right in that Americans should not blithely accept pre-election poll numbers that are promulgated by an Establishment and a media that have been proven to be nearly 100 percent co-opted.
Already, the drumbeat of the mainstream media is growing louder with stories of an imminent Clinton victory even as the FBI has reopened their investigation into her email case and Attorney General Loretta Lynch has accused FBI Director James Comey of not playing ball with the Clinton-Obama Democrats.
The New York Times is practically running a ticker tape parade on its website, blaring that the chances of a Clinton victory are “91 percent.” Just don’t look too far behind the big black Establishment curtain, because you might not like what you see on the other side.
There have been reports of schools canceling classes over fears of Election Day violence. Certainly, there have been accusations from the Trump camp of Clinton campaign workers breaking election laws in multiple states.
Ad hoc observers have said that in some counties in Florida, for instance, many people have seen residents with Trump voting signs in their yards, with no Hillary signs to be seen at all. So if Hillary wins in such a locale, where do all her voters live?
But the real excitement in this race will come when the polling stations close and the results are tabulated; then we will almost surely know whether this election is an outright fraud or not.
Or if its results are out-of-sync with the massive crowds seen at Trump rallies and huge support shown for Trump online as voters view and comment on the nearly endless stream of Wikileaks emails, outrageous videos of Hillary Clinton’s public behavior and the morass of moral failures that encompasses the daily decisions of the Clinton clan as a whole.
If it appears that there’s been fraud — whether it’s vote fraud as was discussed in the infamous Project Veritas videos or election fraud as has been discussed in numerous articles and forums — you can expect that the American public won’t take it lying down.
There may be massive protests that may make the recent demonstrations by groups such as Black Lives Matter look like picnic outings. But worse for the Democrats — even if Hillary manages to squeak out an election victory — is the specter of impeachment hearings and/or an indictment of her (and possibly other members of her campaign and/or foundation).
Some lawmakers, such as Congressman Mo Brooks of Alabama, have openly discussed this possibility being initiated before Clinton can even take office. Certainly, voters should prepare to “dig in” in the event of such an action.
It’s long past time to “drain the swamp” in Washington — to use Donald Trump’s words — and if Clinton can be locked up in the process, so much the better.
Rumors have already floated around about Barack Obama possibly leaving the country in the case of a Trump victory. The only question is: would his flight be voluntary, or would it be that of a fugitive running from justice?"

User avatar
rewcox
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5873

Re: USA Politics.

Post by rewcox »

We will gladly send you Trump after he loses the election.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

http://www.gopusa.com/?p=16842?omhide=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/17/exclu ... z4PQ6vXcqY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"FBI agents say the bureau is alarmed over Director James Comey deciding not to suggest that the Justice Department prosecute Hillary Clinton over her mishandling of classified information.
According to an interview transcript given to The Daily Caller, provided by an intermediary who spoke to two federal agents with the bureau last Friday, agents are frustrated by Comey’s leadership.
“This is a textbook case where a grand jury should have convened but was not. That is appalling,” an FBI special agent who has worked public corruption and criminal cases said of the decision. “We talk about it in the office and don’t know how Comey can keep going.”
The agent was also surprised that the bureau did not bother to search Clinton’s house during the investigation.
“We didn’t search their house. We always search the house. The search should not just have been for private electronics, which contained classified material, but even for printouts of such material,” he said.
“There should have been a complete search of their residence,” the agent pointed out. “That the FBI did not seize devices is unbelievable. The FBI even seizes devices that have been set on fire.”
Another special agent for the bureau that worked counter-terrorism and criminal cases said he is offended by Comey’s saying: “we” and “I’ve been an investigator.”
After graduating from law school, Comey became a law clerk to a U.S. District Judge in Manhattan and later became an associate in a law firm in the city. After becoming a U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York, Comey’s career moved through the U.S. Attorney’s Office until he became Deputy Attorney General during the George W. Bush administration.
After Bush left office, Comey entered the private sector and became general counsel and Senior Vice President for Lockheed Martin, among other private sector posts. President Barack Obama appointed him to FBI director in 2013 replacing out going-director Robert Mueller.
“Comey was never an investigator or special agent. The special agents are trained investigators and they are insulted that Comey included them in ‘collective we’ statements in his testimony to imply that the SAs agreed that there was nothing there to prosecute,” the second agent said. “All the trained investigators agree that there is a lot to prosecuted but he stood in the way.”
He added, “The idea that [the Clinton/e-mail case] didn’t go to a grand jury is ridiculous.”
According to Washington D.C. attorney Joe DiGenova, more FBI agents will be talking about the problems at bureau and specifically the handling of the Clinton case by Comey when Congress comes back into session and decides to force them to testify by subpoena.
DiGenova told WMAL radio’s Drive at Five last week, “People are starting to talk. They’re calling their former friends outside the bureau asking for help. We were asked to day to provide legal representation to people inside the bureau and agreed to do so and to former agents who want to come forward and talk. Comey thought this was going to go away.”
He explained, “It’s not. People inside the bureau are furious. They are embarrassed. They feel like they are being led by a hack but more than that that they think he’s a crook. They think he’s fundamentally dishonest. They have no confidence in him. The bureau inside right now is a mess.”
He added, “The most important thing of all is that the agents have decided that they are going to talk.”

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

"Volunteers canvassing and dropping off literature at houses Monday for Nevada Republican Senate candidate Rep. Joe Heck were followed by supporters of Hillary Clinton, who then subsequently pulled down the literature, a source within the Nevada Republican Party told The Daily Caller. In Reno, Nevada, two volunteers for the Heck campaign were out canvassing and dropping off Joe Heck for Senate literature when they noticed they were being followed by Hillary Clinton campaign workers. The staffers following them were wearing HRC buttons and HRC stickers. Beyond following them, the HRC workers began going up to houses and illegally removing Heck literature from the doors,” the Nevada GOP source said. “When the Heck volunteers noticed this going on, they stopped to take pictures of the illegal action.” The Nevada GOP source provided TheDC with a picture of the alleged Clinton supporter. “The police showed up on the scene, spoke to our volunteers and tracked down the HRC staffers who denied any wrong doing despite the photos in question,” the source said. “This kind of harassment and illegal activity shouldn’t be tolerated and shows how nervous the Democrats are about their chances in Nevada.” Greg Bailor, Nevada Republican Party executive director, said in a statement, “News that the Hillary Clinton campaign was illegally stealing Joe Heck’s campaign literature from voters homes is disturbing to stay the least.”

“Clearly the Democrats are nervous about their prospect tomorrow and are taking any action possible to try to salvage their chances at the poll tomorrow,” Bailor added. The Nevada GOP executive director asked that Hillary Clinton and her campaign immediately apologise for the actions of their supporters."


http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/07/exclu ... z4PRfo6hOz" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
Elizabeth
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 11796
Location: East Coast Australia

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Elizabeth »

http://eaglerising.com/38280/julian-@#$ ... -election/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://minutemennews.com/26873-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"Trump has claimed that the election was a rig job and several emails released by WikiLeaks points to Clinton’s stealing the DNC nomination from Sanders. Now we have the CEO of WikiLeaks saying the same thing in an interview: "Trump would not be permitted to win. Why do I say that? Because he’s had every establishment off side; Trump doesn’t have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment, but banks, intelligence [agencies], arms companies… big foreign money … are all united behind Hillary Clinton, and the media as well, media owners and even journalists themselves."

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: USA Politics.

Post by Joel »


User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: USA Politics.

Post by skmo »

Okay, I'd seen this some time ago, but it's funny enough to warrant re-watching it once more.

Post Reply