Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

danger danger

Trumpsky might be looney tunes, might be crazy like a fox. Doesn't matter.


He's now threatening a "crackdown" on the epidemic of illegal voting. Whatever is going on, that has to be viewed as a brazen attempt to remove the last bit of democracy from our republic.


I think the opposition needs to keep the heat on him, see if he totally wigs out. But putting the Dem sponsored limits on his nuclear authority would be a good idea in the meanwhile.



13 Replies
Senior Contributor

Re: danger danger

Getting the feeling you wil never win again are you ?

Senior Advisor

Re: danger danger

Now the 4chan dem media complex has backed itself into a corner where it will have to defend voter fraud.




If Trump’s media enemies like CNN once again ignore the March for Life, they will discredit themselves.  It is very clear to me that President Trump intends to destroy the credibility of his media enemies.  He realistically understands that they are implacable enemies seeking his impeachment and removal from office (on grounds yet to be ginned up) or, as a fallback, defeat for re-election and a midterm election disaster for the GOP.  Weakening the credibility of the media is a continuing goal of his administration.

That is the context in which his multiple remarks concerning illegal votes has to be understood.  I think President Trump knew that if he made remarks about illegal voting, the media would spring to action and present the opposite position and would characterize his thinking as a lie.  The problem with this is that a lack of evidence is not proof for the contrary position.  We simply do not know how much vote fraud there is because nobody takes the trouble to investigate how much there is.  When a voter presents himself at the polls or requests an absentee ballot, there is no automatic search to discover if the person is a legitimate voter.  The very act of asking for voter ID is considered discriminatory by many, including some in the courts.

California has adopted a system for granting voter registration to people receiving drivers’ licenses.  If the applicants don’t specify illegal alien status at the time, they receive a license that entitles them to register and vote.  Even if they do specify that they are here illegally, they still get a license where the distinction is hard to see.

Illegal aliens aside, there is the question of people voting under the name of other people, especially the dead who have not been purged from voting rolls.

John Fund has written and co-authored two well documented books on the extent of vote fraud.  The MSM are now demanding proof for Trump’s assertions, opening the door for the Trump administration to conduct a detailed investigation of vote fraud, which has to have been a strategy all along.  When the investigation will be attacked as an effort at “vote suppression,” the Trump administration will have media demands for data to point at.

Because nobody can deny that there is some vote fraud, the question becomes, “How much?”

If positioning the media to demand what he all along wanted (but knew that the media would attack) is irrational, I do not see the logic.

And as for a president “lying,” outgoing President Obama issued a whopper just before he left office:

Obama said the U.S. is the only country in the advanced world that makes it harder to vote rather than easier.

"And that dates back, there's an ugly history to that that we should not be shy about talking about," he said.

In fact, the United States is an outlier in terms of voter ID and ease of voting.

So the question that the MSM is pushing is, “How much vote fraud is there?”

And Trump has a “character issue” in accomplishing this. 

Esteemed Advisor

Reminds me of Winston Smith

1984 "the best books teach you what you already know"


3020, that is exactly what I said about how many illegal votes are out there....we really don't know at this point, but it warrants a prompt investigation....Once again, Trump is dumb like a fox.


He really backed the libtards into a corner again.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Reminds me of Winston Smith

Sure - let's bring on the recount.  Go for it.   You suppose that all those supposed illegal votes were for Democrats.  How many were for The Sniffer?


Bring it on....


Tick Tock....



Re: danger danger

BTW, those who appeared to fall for the con hook, line and sinker will be remarkably agile in declaring that they were on to it all along, but it was the only way to get what they wanted.*


*The head to head polls on a prospective Trump/Clinton matchup always looked uncomfortably close. Kasich, Rubio, Cruz all polled better against her.


Of all of them, only Kasich gave Sanders a run for his money. So no, I'm not giving the DLC/DNC establishment a pass in the least.


But that doesn't legitimize the whackoburger either.

Senior Advisor

Re: Reminds me of Winston Smith




CNN’s Jake Tapper, and many other pundits, assert there is “no evidence” to support Trump’s belief about a large number of illegal votes cast in the election. As a trial lawyer, our method of assessing the factual basis of a claim differs from some in the press: what would admissible evidence look like to support each side of a claim if tried to a jury under the rules of evidence? Answer? Trump actually has some evidence on his side.

The best study on the subject — a study that meets the Daubert standards for admissible evidence in a jury trial in a legal courtroom — provides substantial evidence that non-citizen voting alone likely reached over a million in this el....  A trio of well-regarded scholars used scientifically approved methods to study the question of non-citizen voting in federal elections. The result of their study published in one of the best-regarded peer-review political science journals, Electoral Studies. The evidence from their study suggested upwards of 10% of non-citizens voted in 2008; given the issues implicated in this election, a higher number would be a reasonable inference for a jury to conclude. Given the increase in non-citizen members of the population, the same study’s conclusions would project out to millions of illegal votes from non-citizen voters in this election. Now Trump’s opponents will surely argue several experts have questioned the study’s methods, with the Washington Post giving Four Pinocchios to the use of this study to support claims of problems with illegal immigrants voting. However,the scholars well defended their study against critics in this Washington Post article. At the very least, that is enough to move forward with a case, and I believe raises legitimate questions that should be debated.

Further evidence would derive from illegal votes due to illegally counted votes, or some of our vote counters “accidentally” over-counted votes in some precincts or counties. If the latter never happened, recounts would never change results. Here, again, Trump has persuasive admissible evidence on his side: the extraordinary discrepancy discovered in Detroit precincts where more votes were counted than voters. Let me repeat that: Detroit precincts reported more votes in the Presidential election than voters recorded in their vot...The over-counting overwhelmingly occurred in heavily pro-Hillary precincts with precinct workers overwhelmingly in Democratically controlled cities and counties.  Indeed, people like pollsters at People’s Pundit Daily, complained for years about the peculiar habits of certain counties late-reporting their precinct results, in a manner that reminds some of the old habit of Daley’s Chicago machine or LBJ’s late-counting in....

Lastly, Trump’s inference of voter fraud, if true, should suggest disparate turnout rates in the parts of the country with the highest non-citizen population or history of ballot-counting controversy. Here again, California’s turnout both exceeded expectations, differed substantially from turnout in other non-competitive states, and produced vote totals no major pollster in California forecast for Hillary, when most polls under-counted Trump votes across the state and country.

In sum, if on trial, Trump’s belief of illegal voting has more than enough evidence to get to a jury.  Sorry, Jake Tapper, but, from a jury trial perspective, the evidence isn’t as one-sided as you would like it to be

the craven cowardice indicator

will be interesting, if nothing else.


The majority of Republicans know there's nothing to this and many have said so. But it will be interesting to see, if he pushed it, how many fall into line for fun and profit.



Esteemed Advisor

Re: Reminds me of Winston Smith

I think this is the singular issue that will define where the USA goes ...if it remains a sovereign nation or not. If we let the rest of the world run our elections, not the Russians showing what a lying scumbag Mrs. Clinton was, but illegals actually casting votes, our country will go back to Obama's nightmare.


and Trumpsky's crowd was much, much larger- than either the women's march or Obama's inaugurations.


And he was going to drain the swamp, lol.


The man is unwell. You may see him as the savior of your authoritarian aspirations for your country but you're riding a tiger.