November 28, 2016

4 Pinocchios to Trump's claim that millions voted illegally (and without them, he'd have won the popular vote too).

WaPo's Glenn Kessler tries to find some evidence to look at and finds none.

It seems to me that it's Donald Trump's responsibility to point to the evidence, otherwise he simply sounds like an agent of chaos. Why would he want to do that, right when his interest should be in appealing to our desire for resolution, peace, and a smooth transition? He shouldn't be weird! I know he won the presidency by resisting advice that he behave in a way conventional people perceive as normal, but he's not running for the presidency anymore. If he acts as though he thinks he is, he's helping his piddling adversaries. Why?!

Kessler seems to guess that Trump picked up the accusation from "purveyors of false facts as Infowars.com."
Back when Trump was trailing in the polls and was threatening to dispute the election results because the system was “rigged,” we’ve previously given Trump four Pinocchios for making a number of bogus claims about alleged voter fraud.

Among other things, he falsely asserted that illegal immigrants were tipping the results in elections, based on a misinterpretation of disputed data. Even the researcher who produced the data said Trump was taking his findings out of context: “Our results suggest that almost all elections in the U.S. are not determined by non-citizen participation, with occasional and very rare potential exceptions.”
Kessler doesn't really know what Trump knows. How can you know he's lying until he reveals his sources of information? Kessler is jumping the gun. And I'm not very satisfied by a quote from a researcher who admits that he thinks some U.S. elections are determined by non-citizen participation!

ADDED: Could Trump have been joking? It kind of makes sense as a joke, but I'm only arriving at this idea the morning after I read the tweet, so... not much of a joke. Maybe Trump will shout "November Fools!" later today.

117 comments:

AllenS said...

I'm very, very satisfied that there are no illegal votes being cast in Alden Township, Polk County, WI. I wouldn't be surprised if a large amount of votes being cast ARE being cast by illegals in California.

Can I prove it? No. Can you and Kessler prove that there isn't?

rich hahn said...

Is the media really that dumb or just pretending to be?

Trump was just tweaking them for treating the recount like it was real. If the media was doing their job, they would find out who is financing the recount and what is the real purpose. The purpose is to undermine the election process - exactly what the left accused the Russians of doing.

PB said...

We know that some illegal aliens register and vote. There is proof. The only question is, how many? The fervor with which Democrats block efforts to cleanup voter rolls, verify registration, and verify voter identity when voting, leads to the obvious conclusion that they recognize vote fraud is very important to them.

Mike Sylwester said...

Now that Trump will become the US President, he can use the Federal Government's investigative resources to study the evidence.

Trump's Justice Department can thoroughly study samples of voting lists and compare them to the US Government's databases of

* citizen-status

* felons

* deaths.

For sure, Scientific Progressives will find some federal judges who will declare such studies to be unConstitutional.

Also, any illegal aliens who did vote should be prosecuted and deported. They can appeal their deportations from the US embassies in their home countries.

Unknown said...

CNN, nytimes, wapo, althouse are being purposefully clueless. There is a 100 percent chance that more than zero votes were cast by dead people and illegal immigrants and snowbirds double up. The evidence is basic which is the lack of voting ID laws and history and the incentive of democrats to win. Duh! No one evens disputes this fact. We literally learn this every 2 years a few months after the elections. Google it.

mezzrow said...

It's just another way to get inside their OODA loop, Ann. They didn't expect that as a response, I'm sure.

The phrase OODA loop refers to the decision cycle of observe, orient, decide, and act, developed by military strategist and United States Air Force Colonel John Boyd. Boyd applied the concept to the combat operations process, often at the strategic level in military operations. It is now also often applied to understand commercial operations and learning processes. The approach favors agility over raw power in dealing with human opponents in any endeavor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop

Does the Trump response have to be based on fact? His next step is to say "prove me wrong..." Can they? What effort and resources will this absorb? What does he know that they do not know - and vice versa?

Mind you, this is a response specifically aimed at those who want to see Trump fail.

Mike Sylwester said...

Also, any illegal aliens who did vote should be prosecuted and deported. They can appeal their deportations from the US embassies in their home countries.

Also any permanent-resident non-citizens who voted should have their permanent-resident status revoked and then should be prosecuted and deported, etc.

MPH said...

Hillary was deeply flawed, but she wasn't interested in fomenting civil war. Trump is bananas (and is turning the country into a banana republic).

Mike Sylwester said...

Also, any felons who voted should be sent back to prison.

Brando said...

I see his "millions of illegal votes" tweet more as a "you guys were more the beneficiaries of fraud than I was" retort than anything he seriously believes (otherwise, of course, he'd welcome a recount so as to not only prove he won fair and square, but to justify the voter ID laws that the GOP supports--after all, Dems keep saying "there's no evidence of fraud and this is just to disenfranchise Dem voters").

That said, I don't see why he doesn't welcome the recounts--and in fact request it be expanded to more states. It's almost inconceivable that the new results could flip any states, let alone enough states to change the final result (they'd need to flip both Florida and one more state). It may uncover some fraud, and justify voter ID laws. Seems a no-risk strategy to me.

Michael K said...

"the obvious conclusion that they recognize vote fraud is very important to them."

Trump, once in office, needs to say, "We need to determine how many illegal aliens voted and to prevent a repeat."

Then the AG and Congress can work on legislation to purge voter rolls and enforce voter ID. Perfect opening for such action.

The Hillary/Stein recount efforts fit well with the argument to do so.

Mike Sylwester said...

It will be interesting to see what legal arguments the Scientific Progressives will use to try to stop the Trump Administration from studying illegal voting.

They almost always use the "disparate impact" argument. I suppose they will argue that any such studies would have a disparate impact on Hispanics and on African-American felons.

Michael K said...

"Trump is bananas (and is turning the country into a banana republic)."

Says the Hillary voter who thinks Putin rigged the election.

Robert Cook said...

I'm surprised anyone ever takes seriously anything said by The Donald. The rule of thumb with him should always be, "He's lying, pandering, or deluded" until his assertions can be proved true.

I wonder how his supporters will react when he fails to achieve any of his promises. Well...we know. When life continues worse for them, they'll blame "his enemies" for thwarting him, (just as Obama's supporters have done).

My name goes here. said...

"...but he's not running for the presidency anymore."

That is where I think you are wrong. What is the best outcome from the demorat side of things? Do they really think they can flip any state? No. But their best outcome would be to prevent the slate of electors from being able to vote in three states throwing the election to the House to delegitimize a Trump Presidency. Bush never fought back against that. Trump always will. Good for Trump.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Is there proof? Likely not, but it's basic common sense and understanding of statistics.

Millions (possibly tens of millions) of illegals in the country
They would benefit significantly (relatively speaking) if Hillary were to win
Encouraged to vote, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly
Extremely small likelihood of being found out if they voted

What do you THINK happened?

Greg said...

This whole popular vote versus college thing is so absurd, I think the media is deliberately goading Trump.

a) Trump is right, he would have campaigned more in NY, California etc. He played the rules as they are
b) Republicans in California, NY etc know their vote doesn't count so they are more likely to stay home
c) Most countries have a regional aspect to who gets to be leader, Canadians like me don't even cast a direct vote for Prime Minister unless you live in his riding.
d) Nobody got over 50%, how can you assume Hillary would have taken the other votes. In many other types of multi party systems you specify a 2nd choice, maybe it would have been Trump but we'll never know because see point a) - rules.

Virgil Hilts said...

I doubt illegal voting is more than say low six figures (if even that high), but we can't/don't know because so many people (and the MSM) both (i) refuse to investigate its magnitude and (ii) then deny it exists because of the lack of any comprehensive investigations showing its magnitude.
I think there is something similar going on with statistics about crimes committed by illegals. The feds refuse to track/coordinate such information and then the MSM claims that there is no comprehensive data/proof showing that illegals actually commit crimes at disproportionate levels. From a Fox news story:
"There are a lot of reasons states don’t make this information readily available, and there is no clearinghouse of data at high levels," said former Department of Justice attorney J. Christian Adams, who has conducted exhaustive research on the subject. "These numbers would expose how serious the problem is and make the government look bad.”

Mike Sylwester said...

Glenn Kessler wrote:

The whole thing started with a few tweets by Gregg Phillips, a self-described conservative voter fraud specialist. .... These claims were then picked up by such purveyors of false facts as Infowars.com, a conspiracy-minded website that, among other things, claims that no one actually died in a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.

Kessler is a smear artist using a classic smear tactic. Here he is smearing Phillips with Infowars.

rhhardin said...

It seems fine to me. It's a media tweak, not a joke. Trump owns the news cycle, which results in sand in the media-left spin of the day.

That's how it's done.

We're dealing with soap opera women editing the news cycle and how to end that.

Bill Harshaw said...

Didn't Trump during October recruit thousands and thousands of poll watchers to insure against illegal voting? What happened? A HUGE failure in his own assessment. Hopefully his presidency shows better management.

rhhardin said...

It's sad to see Althouse clutching pearls on the matter. Thinking like a woman without seeing that she's thinking like a woman.

Don't stop thinking like a woman but look at the instrument panel when in the clouds, so you know where the men are.

David said...

How many illegal and fraudulent votes are cast? More than a trivial amount for sure, given the closeness of some elections. (Yes I mean you, Al Franken.) But actually nobody knows. It's not an easy thing to know, even if you are trying, but as a nation we are not trying.

sunsong said...

Trump is a serial liar! Trump lies more than Clinton. Trump and his supporters have no moral authority whatsoever! A lot was lost in supporting a liar like Trump. His view - the ends justify the means is immoral. Win at all cost is immoral. The right used to at least claim to be about character and doing the right thing. That's over now with the embrace of Trump. It seems to me that when Trump was fact checked his percentage of lies was around 70% to Hillary's 20%. Hillary's lies - that's clear - but mostly about big things like her email server. Trump lies about anything and everything.

Original Mike said...

“Our results suggest that almost all elections in the U.S. are not determined by non-citizen participation, with occasional and very rare potential exceptions. [emphasis added]

Hello.

Gov98 said...

I don't know, I'm not inside Trump's head. But I will tell you what I think. Republicans have wanted Voter ID laws relatively consistently over time throughout the country. Now with the Democrats and Greens crying regarding ensuring voting integrity, it screams a little false to those who have been arguing for Voter ID over the past 20 years to now be screaming voting integrity.

BUT, that's the key. See, now that progressives are screaming for voting integrity, point out that in fact voting integrity is a huge issue, and now that I'm president I will go about solving the issue by requiring nationwide Voter ID. In other words, Trump (like most persuaders) reframes the issue, so that he can present his solution, where once you've conceded the problem, his solution is more naturally obvious, desirable, and successful at achieving the goal. Then in May, when Democrats are screaming about National Voter ID and Voter Registration Roll Cleanup, you can say (and 70% of independents and 98% of Republicans will agree and that's what matters) "Wait a second why are you objecting now, we're trying to fix this problem you identified together."

Bob Ellison said...

Hush, Gov98. You're showing your cards.

Phil 3:14 said...

To paraphrase John McCain:

"We're all drama queens now."

Vancomycin said...

"Millions (possibly tens of millions) of illegals in the country
They would benefit significantly (relatively speaking) if Hillary were to win
Encouraged to vote, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly
Extremely small likelihood of being found out if they voted

What do you THINK happened?"

Too, remember that in states like, say, California, ANYONE that wants to can get a state issued driver's license. Here in the states legally or not. Combine that with motor voter (again, in say, California), and you're putting people ALREADY breaking the law into an honor system that they won't actually vote. Yeah, I'll bet a fair number did, and for Hillary.

damikesc said...

He should demand a recount in CA if this ball starts rolling.

It makes zero logical sense to assume there are no illegals voting when most licenses go to illegals in CA and nobody there is all that concerned about checking ID since it is a Democrat run state.

That said, I don't see why he doesn't welcome the recounts--and in fact request it be expanded to more states.

Because when partisans know the number they have to hit to overturn an election, the propensity to cheat and weasel their way there is significant. I see zero reason to assume a recount is MORE accurate than the original count. With the original, they don't know how many votes are needed for their preferred candidate to win.

Kessler is a smear artist using a classic smear tactic. Here he is smearing Phillips with Infowars.

Happens a lot. And they'd be upset if a conservative said "This was reported by CBS, who once took documents typed up in MS Word in the 2000's, and claimed they were notes from the TX Air Nat'l Guard in the 60's". Or "This was reported on NBC, who used to rig trucks to blow up to attack GM because their trucks allegedly blew up."

David Begley said...


" It seems to me that it's the media's responsibility to investigate and publish the evidence." Fixed.

That's how the MSM game works. It never investigates and then claims there is no evidence. Circular argument.

bgates said...

Hillary's lies - that's clear - but mostly about big things like her email server.

And little things, like being targeted by sniper fire in Bosnia.

All of Hillary's lies are in the range between lies about committing felonies by endangering national security in order to cover up the commission of other felonies by selling her influence, and tiny inconsequential lies.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

What good is enticing all these illegals over the boarder if they aren't going to vote for you?

Until recently, all an illegal needed to vote in Wisconsin was a utility bill and a fake SS number. To think there weren't thousands casting illegal votes requires a special kind of stupid. I'm thinking fewer illegals voting in Wisconsin due to voter ID is one of the big reasons the state slipped away from the Dems this year. Yahoo!

Brando said...

"Because when partisans know the number they have to hit to overturn an election, the propensity to cheat and weasel their way there is significant. I see zero reason to assume a recount is MORE accurate than the original count. With the original, they don't know how many votes are needed for their preferred candidate to win."

Depends on the standards for the recount. If it's simply "run the numbers through again" then the second count is no more accurate than the first. But if they do hand recounts, or audit the way the votes were tallied (or randomly checked up on ballots to see if they uncover any ineligible voters, or double votes) and do this with both sides participating in each part of the process, they have a better chance exposing any chicanery.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

Yeah those Clintons. Pillars of morality, I tell ya!

Thanks for the smile, sunny.

Mike Sylwester said...

Virgil Hilts at 6:44 AM

I think there is something similar going on with statistics about crimes committed by illegals. The feds refuse to track/coordinate such information and then the MSM claims that there is no comprehensive data/proof showing that illegals actually commit crimes at disproportionate levels.

Because Trump will become US President, the US public will be informed for the first time about the numbers of criminals who are foreign born -- and in particular are illegal aliens.

Mike Sylwester said...

The Trump Administration should study also fraud in absentee voting. I think that's the overwhelming majority of fraudulent votes.

damikesc said...

Depends on the standards for the recount. If it's simply "run the numbers through again" then the second count is no more accurate than the first. But if they do hand recounts, or audit the way the votes were tallied (or randomly checked up on ballots to see if they uncover any ineligible voters, or double votes) and do this with both sides participating in each part of the process, they have a better chance exposing any chicanery.

I'm looking at the fiasco that was FL in 2000 for how they will handle a recount. They will demand manual recounts and they will then go to town on any vote that is not for Hillary. Stories of what they did to FL voters (particularly overseas deployed military) are terrible.

The DNC has too long a track record of stealing elections for me to view them as a good faith partner. Add into that that all "provisional ballots" are tossed in there and there is little way to dispute if a voter is legal or illegal and this is just a desperate attempt to de-legitimize Trump.

MikeR said...

"Too, remember that in states like, say, California, ANYONE that wants to can get a state issued driver's license. Here in the states legally or not."
Indeed - I don't see why Trump has to bring _evidence_. This is in his opinion the likely result of pathetic vetting of voters. He should tell people that if they don't want unreliable elections, there's a simple solution. In the meantime spare us your claims that he's wrong. Since you don't keep track, we don't have a clue.

Luke Lea said...

Just one more reason we need a biometric national I.D. Time to replace the old cardboard Social Security card with a 21st century version.

rhhardin said...

Trump is a serial liar!

That's the way time works.

Gahrie said...

Am I the only person in the US who has heard of hyperbole?

Or did Obama actually expect the seas to recede?

rhhardin said...

Time to replace the old cardboard Social Security card with a 21st century version.

The SS number isn't for identification. The 1040 tax forms used to come each year with your SS number printed on the label. They asked you to stick it to the top of the form instead of writing in your SS number, in fact.

What happened is banks and financial institutions got lazy and began using it as a unique id, and dropped "know your customer" as a security device.

Then that made the number becamse useful in identity theft, and we have today's problems, along with the efficiency it gains of course.

TheThinMan said...

Hillary/Soros/Stein have already destroyed any possibility of a "smooth transition." What Trump says or doesn't say in reaction to these events won't undo the damage.

We know that when Democrats pretend to "recount" they are really stealing an election before everyone's eyes as troves of "lost" ballots mysteriously appear and, wouldn't you know it, are all for the Democratic candidate! Absentee ballots cast for the Republican are disqualified on an arcane technicality while the same standard doesn't apply to the Democratic ones. That's because the Dems lawyer up big time while the GOP naively think there's no need to spend their resources on a recount since the system has to be fair. That's how we have joke writer Al Franken as a Senator, to name one example. Of course, the MSM assists by simply not covering the shenanigans.

Fabi said...

sunsong took away my moral authority!

Mary Beth said...

Hillary was deeply flawed, but she wasn't interested in fomenting civil war.

Foreign wars, on the other hand....

TheThinMan said...

One more thing: millions of Americans jaywalk. Give me 4 Pinocchios for saying that because... where's my proof?

MikeR said...

"One more thing: millions of Americans jaywalk. Give me 4 Pinocchios for saying that because... where's my proof?" Correct - 4 Pinocchios should mean, there is proof to the contrary. Otherwise you need to allow 8 Pinocchios for real lies.

Rob McLean said...

he simply sounds like an agent of chaos

Would you believe...?

FullMoon said...

Robert Cook said... [hush]​[hide comment]

I'm surprised anyone ever takes seriously anything said by The Donald. The rule of thumb with him should always be, "He's lying, pandering, or deluded" until his assertions can be proved true.

I wonder how his supporters will react when he fails to achieve any of his promises. Well...we know. When life continues worse for them,...

Finally acknowledgement that life has been worse under Obama.

rehajm said...

FULL DISCLOSURE: Kessler's WaPo column is opinion/editorial and obligated to neither facts nor checking.

MayBee said...

What good is enticing all these illegals over the boarder if they aren't going to vote for you?

What would be the point of making it easy for illegal immigrants to be here, make it easy for them to register to vote, make it easy for them to vote, invite them to speak at the DNC, and make their very existence a central issue of your campaign if you didn't want them to vote?

Open question, especially to Althouse: if you were here illegally, and worked here with a fake SS number, and it was easy for you to vote (as it is in California), would you decline to vote?

Mike Sylwester said...

Kessler should write a fact-check article about the Clinton claim that Trump has caused an increase in school bullying.

FullMoon said...

Gov98 said... [hush]​[hide comment]

I don't know, I'm not inside Trump's head. But I will tell you what I think. Republicans have wanted Voter ID laws relatively consistently over time throughout the country. Now with the Democrats and Greens crying regarding ensuring voting integrity, it screams a little false to those who have been arguing for Voter ID over the past 20 years to now be screaming voting integrity.

BUT, that's the key. See, now that progressives are screaming for voting integrity, point out that in fact voting integrity is a huge issue, and now that I'm president I will go about solving the issue by requiring nationwide Voter ID. In other words, Trump (like most persuaders) reframes the issue, so that he can present his solution, where once you've conceded the problem, his solution is more naturally obvious, desirable, and successful at achieving the goal. Then in May, when Democrats are screaming about National Voter ID and Voter Registration Roll Cleanup, you can say (and 70% of independents and 98% of Republicans will agree and that's what matters) "Wait a second why are you objecting now, we're trying to fix this problem you identified together."


Scott Adams, is that you?

GWash said...

i've heard the voter fraud meme many times on this blog... but no one and i mean NO ONE has put forth proof.. voter suppression is much more of a problem that fraud... herein lies (pun intended) the problem with herr trump... you can't tell when he is joking even about the most inconsequential things... going forward how are the markets, allies, enemies and citizens supposed accept what he says.. he is a man without honor... he and his cronies will steal us blind and folks here will defend him no matter what... what has happened to our Conservative values and the idea of a national melting pot family?... we are now back to the bad old days of robber barons and we will get whatever crumbs fall from the table.. we voted for it and now we own it..

boycat said...

There's no proof Jimmy Hofffa ever lived, let alone that he was murdered. We can do a lot of these.

FullMoon said...

Rehajm said...

FULL DISCLOSURE: Kessler's WaPo column is opinion/editorial and obligated to neither facts nor checking.


Trumps statement is opinion and obligated to neither facts nor checking.

John said...

Constitutional question for the Prof:



I've not looked at California's constitution or laws but I am going to assume that they require US and state citizenship to vote.

Let us assume for the moment that there are some illegal aliens who voted in California's presidential election.

Is there any federal law or US constitutional provision that has been violated?

The constitution gives states the absolute right to decide how electors shall be chosen. As far as I can tell, that means that states can allow anyone who shows up at the polls, regardless of citizenship, age, or other conditions to vote. Some states allow felons to vote, some even from prison. Others don't.

Caveat: The right to vote can't be restricted by age over 18, sex, race and some other conditions. States have always had the right to allow 18 year olds, women, blacks etc to vote even before they were constitutionally required to.

What say you, Ann? Is there any federal bar to illegal aliens voting?

And does anyone know what the California Constitution says on this? Is US citizenship required?

John Henry

Ambrose said...

Let's thoroughly investigate whether illegal aliens voted - and how many and where. All those who say they are upset with Trump's claim - let's prove him wrong. I strongly suspect the usual suspects will be against any such investigation. As our President-elect might say: "very very against" it

MayBee said...

We need a thorough investigation of voter roll management.

It could cover voter suppression (which is what is claimed whenever voter rolls are purged), duplicate registrations, non-citizen registration, and the methodology and frequency of voter roll purging/maintenance.

MikeR said...

"but no one and i mean NO ONE has put forth proof.. voter suppression is much more of a problem that fraud" GWash, you're entitled to your opinion, but can I assume that you understand that it is opinion? Obviously people here disagree.

Darrell said...

Maybe one day, readers will reduce the WaPo building to rubble.

damikesc said...

but no one and i mean NO ONE has put forth proof.. voter suppression is much more of a problem that fraud

I note that you provide no evidence of suppression. Shooting for irony?

GWash said...

ambrose, these accusations have been investigated ad nauseum.. if there was even a whiff of anything, these would have been investigated and prosecuted... there are plenty of good republican AG and DAs who would be more than eager to make a reputation prosecuting voter fraud... it is a myth of the right media... why are there so many republican governors, state senators etc... trump has won because of the electoral college, now govern...

David Begley said...

The evidence to prove up voter fraud would be easy to develop. A task force of the California AG, county attorneys and the sheriffs would examine the voter lists. Then compare to citizenship records. Make arrests and the prosecute. If a thousand people were convicted and served time, a message would be sent. That's how the IRS works with the DOJ.

But, of course, the California AG won't enforce the law.

traditionalguy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Darrell said...

Somewhere between 500,000 and 1.5 million illegals have come into the US each year since 1984 (32 years)--Reagan's amnesty. Democrats control the voting at the county level and they make no effort to make a count of illegal voters. Then they say that since there is no data, we must assume that the count is zero.

traditionalguy said...

The case goes as follows: that the recent popular trend in Democrat run states for issuing non-citizens drivers licenses intentionally DOES NOT discriminate when it also asks for the applicant check "yes" on whether they are also registering to vote.

Then they use early voter or mail in voter to close the loop started by Motor Voter.And couple that with Obama ordered Non-Enforcement of Law that is well know to eliminate fear of violating laws concerning Citizenship...or mere papers.

Trump is raising that issue, which is one the Dem's recount cannot touch unless armies of investigators finds all of these voters and demand from them a proof of citizenship.

FullMoon said...


Blogger GWash said...

... what has happened to our Conservative values and the idea of a national melting pot family?...


Yeah, that went out the window beginning with "African American", and continuing through hispanic american, right on up to lgbt

Darrell said...

Let's post armed men and women at every voting point and shoot the illegal voters in the head and count the bodies afterward. That'll give us an accurate count.

Bob Ellison said...

Vote fraud.

Captain Drano said...

1) He said "voted illegally" not "illegals that voted" so it incl's of course illegals that vote, but it's much more than that.

2) pasting from another site "It would be epic if he said one of his top agenda items after inauguration was to spot-audit the vote, and that they will be offering a one-time amnesty for those that voted illegally to come forward within, say, 30 days prior to the commencement of the audits.
He should add that the task force will start with college campuses that had on-site voting, and they will cross reference those that voted with their home state's rolls, and/or any neighboring states that did not require voter ID."

Mike said...

1. Democrats structure policy to encourage legal and especially illegal immigration (see Kennedy, Ted; Immigration Act of 1965) by encouraging chain migration but discouraging legal green card bracero programs.

2. The Motor Voter law (1995) makes it easier for illegal aliens to acquire driver licenses and voter registration, especially in states like California, which strenuously avoids certifying registrations and does not check ID at the polls.

3. Hispanic-Americans make up the largest plurality in California, outnumbering every other ethnic group.

4. Estimates are that up to 5- or 6-million California Hispanics are here illegally and driving on valid licenses (25% to 30% of total illegal alien population of 12- to 20-million individuals here at any one time).

So in this one state it is entirely plausible that 1 or 2 million illegal aliens voted. Remember they have all the teachers of their little children scaring the Bejeebus out of them, telling them they will be deported the day after election unless their parents and all their friends vote for the Democrat. This happens in almost every classroom in California every election cycle. They send home straight-Democrat ballot recommendations in Spanish (also highly illegal but the teacher union does it anyway) every election. And you can count on commie Univision and Telemundo to both hew to the party line on radio and TV driving their sheep to the polls with more lies like the ones above.

People who don't live here and see the DNC-Union-Media machine at work can't comprehend the monoculture enforced within the government school system here. The fact this "progressive" state has more exploited Mexican and South American workers than any other state, many living in fear of being deported or separated from family (anchor babies!) here, motivates them to go to the polls. When is the Post ever going to send a real reporter, not Glenn I-Googled-it Kessler, out to report on what is really happening to undermine our electoral system? Never.

That's why a president Trump may be able turn this shit upside down and shake out the fraud. Because no one else even LOOKS for it.

GWash said...


its my understanding that to get a drivers license in California you need to provide proof of age.. how do you do that? a note from your mother?... mostly done with birth certificate, passport or some other official document... it is obvious in most cases who has a right to check the voter registration box or not.. nothing is fool proof.. i would welcome an investigation let's try and settle this once and for all... trump could easily fund it...

MayBee said...

I'm old enough to remember when it was a huge conspiracy theory to say Hillary was unwell.

Mike said...

Bill Harshaw:
Didn't Trump during October recruit thousands and thousands of poll watchers to insure against illegal voting?


Yes, in PA, OH, NC and MI.

What happened?

He won all those states except NC.

A HUGE failure in his own assessment. Hopefully his presidency shows better management.

He won. That was huuuuge! But not a failure exactly, is it?

MayBee said...

GWash- you can register to vote without a driver's license in California.

boycat said...

Let's make it a national project of it, going county by county, examine every single registered voter's registration, confirming that each is a citizen and is actually a living person, and while we're at it we can cross reference looking for snowbirds and college students registered twice or more in different places. Also, we could go back, and retrospectively look at things like the 2004 Washington governor's race, or the 2008 Minnesota senate race, or even Florida 2000, to see how much election fraud influenced these races.

Mike said...

GWash: i've heard the voter fraud meme many times on this blog... but no one and i mean NO ONE has put forth proof.. voter suppression is much more of a problem that fraud

Ha ha ha ha ha. And your proof that suppression is happening is what? The way the New Black Panthers were prosecuted for intimidating people in Philly? No. Because that was swept away by the racially biased AG under Obama. Who was suppressed? Is this the same magic trick where the US government "suppresses" your right to justice by demanding ID and security check to get into court?

There's plenty of proof of voter fraud (Bob Dornan's defeat and Stuart Smalley's election for two apposite examples) but you don't want to see it. Go ahead, plug your ears and go "La la la la" all the way to the dustbin of history.

Boxty said...

"In 2014, a study released by a team of professors from Old Dominion University and George Mason University estimated that approximately 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted In the 2008 presidential election. They also surmised that 2.2 percent voted in the 2010 midterm election."

From: http://www.fairus.org/issue/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-u-s-elections

Based on a 2014 paper by J. Richman titled "Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?"

There is your proof right there. Anybody that says there is no proof is lying or willfully ignorant.

Bruce Hayden said...

Kessler, as usual, beclowns himself as a partisan hack, pretending to be a "fact checker". He can't know that there weren't millions of illegal votes for Crooked Hillary, any more than Trump can know that there were. BUT, what we do know is that a large chunk of her popular win came from one state, CA, where illegals can easily get driver's licenses, voter registration is almost automatic if you do, there is no check for citizenship, and the President essentially told them that they effectively were citizens, and that no one would ever check on whether they voted or not (yes - he said it in a lawyerly way, so has some almost plausible deniability, but his intent was obvious). Apparently, even traditionally Republican Orange County flipped, voting for her this time. They could possibly start the investigation there.

Mike said...

GWash its my understanding that to get a drivers license in California you need to provide proof of age.. how do you do that?

Every town of reasonable size like San Bernardino, for example, has a Mexican Consulate office that "assists" immigrants. They issue a "consul card" that is legally acceptable to use for ID at banks and DMV in California.

You really don't understand the extent of the DNC-Media-Union machine do you?

Mike said...

You know, Boxty, 2.2% of 20 million illegals adds up to more than twice what Trump's estimate was. Hmmmm.

Bruce Hayden said...

The SS number isn't for identification. The 1040 tax forms used to come each year with your SS number printed on the label. They asked you to stick it to the top of the form instead of writing in your SS number, in fact.

What happened is banks and financial institutions got lazy and began using it as a unique id, and dropped "know your customer" as a security device.


Be fair. The IRS uses your SS# to tie together your W-2s, 1099s, etc. Which is why banks and employers need it, so that they can use it on the IRS forms that they have to file.

Static Ping said...

I consider PolitiFact in particular and media fact checkers in general to be fake news. Their partisan double standards, inconsistent vetting, and, at times, bizarre analysis makes them completely unreliable. Fact checkers who do their job correctly most of the time only to occasionally slip in a stinker that, coincidentally, is beneficial to their partisan leanings have to be treated with suspicion and contempt. It's like a double agent that provides good intelligence except in critical situations.

After this election, I also consider the Washington Post to be fake news in general. They have proven they will sell their journalist soul for political gain. They will blatantly lie to their readers. I have greater faith in political party press releases at this point, and I have very little faith in political party press releases.

Unknown said...

People should trust info wars as much as Glenn Kessler.

And how would he know, California is still has over a millionaire ballots to "verify"

Qwinn said...

GWash:

"There are plenty of good Republican AGs and DAs who would be happy to make their reputation prosecuting voter fraud"

Let's stipulate that, though given how the Democrat party is effectively the primary lawyer's guild in the country, it could be argued.

Now, let's remember when Bush tried to fire a few AGs during his presidency. Remember the endless furor that caused among the Left, even though Clinton himself and many other Presidents fired and replaced EvERY AG upon coming into office, making it damn plain that the President has full authority to do what Bush wanted to do?

Do you know WHY Bush wanted to fire them?

Because they were refusing to prosecute voter fraud.

In response, the Left and the media generated a MASSIVE propaganda campaign, smearing Bush as "politicizing justice", to prevent him from being able to put any of those "plenty of good Republican AGs" in a position where they could actually do so.

So, Democrats can fire every Republican AG the day they come into office, for no stated reason at all, but if Democrat AGs refuse to prosecute voter fraud, they can't be fired.

I wonder why that happened. Maybe you can explain it to us

Bill Peschel said...

Did Glenn Kessler look at the Washington Post's claim that Russia was backing Infowars, the Drudge Report, and Zero Hedge?

If he did, would he be brave enough to award his boss 4 Pinnochios?

Static Ping said...

As to the issue at hand, does Trump have proof that 3 million illegal votes were entered this election? Objectively, no.

Is there proof that there were not 3 million illegal votes entered this election? Objectively, no.

Is it in the realm of possibility that there were 3 million illegal votes entered this election? Yes. There are at least 33 million non-citizens in the United States, about two-thirds of them legal but without voting rights, and to get to 3 million requires a relatively small percentage of them to vote. We know that some of them do vote. Then there are the additional forms of voter fraud, which we know with absolute certainty do occur as they are documented but have no numbers as to the extent.

The true answer to the claim is "I don't know if he is correct or not" perhaps with the caveat that "and Trump does not know either." Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

It would be interesting to see if journalists would like to do an investigation into the matter, given that technically that is their job description. I would not hold your breath that the Washington Post will do so, at least not in good faith, given they have removed all doubt that they have given up their integrity this election cycle. Also, this task would require a great deal of work and effort which is a bit much to ask for journalists who mainly write stories by calling three "experts" and getting quotes.

MayBee said...

Now, let's remember when Bush tried to fire a few AGs during his presidency. Remember the endless furor that caused among the Left, even though Clinton himself and many other Presidents fired and replaced EvERY AG upon coming into office, making it damn plain that the President has full authority to do what Bush wanted to do?

Do you know WHY Bush wanted to fire them?

Because they were refusing to prosecute voter fraud.

In response, the Left and the media generated a MASSIVE propaganda campaign, smearing Bush as "politicizing justice", to prevent him from being able to put any of those "plenty of good Republican AGs" in a position where they could actually do so.


Thanks, Qwinn. I just want that in bold, so people remember.

DanTheMan said...

Question for GWash:

There are about 12+ million illegals in the US. What percentage of them do YOU believe voted? You can't believe that it was zero, can you?

bridgecross said...

You're looking for something that isn't there. People have this idea that there is some firewall between Trump the campaigner and cage-rattler, and Trump the sensible man who calmly runs his business and listens to reason. Here in NY we've been watching the man for 40 years, and what you see is what you get. I'm hopeful he won't be a terrible president, and I don't hate the guy. But he is a conspiracy theorist and a mass of trembling insecurity. This is what it is for the next 4-8 years. Buckle up!

Jupiter said...

Glenn Kessler is a paid flack of Jeff Bezos. If Bezos picked him up by his ears and told him to write a column claiming that Bezos could fly, Kessler would respond "How high?". That's why Bezos keeps putting the little kibbles in the little bowl.

Leora said...

For example, in Maryland where in Frederick County 7% of those called for jury duty based on voter rolls claimed to not be citizens in one year, the vote totals went over 60% for Hillary over Trump. So there's no effect on the outcome based on illegal aliens voting, but possibly a substantial effect on the popular vote total. You can't know without a detailed analysis of who voted and who they are. Any attempt to do such a detailed analysis will be greeted as evidence of racism.

hombre said...

Whatever, Hillary and the Dems badly underestimated the number of voting corpses, felons and illegals necessary to defeat Trump. Do they see recounts as a second chance to ""Franken" him?

Or maybe they are trying to screw up the Electoral College with delays and force the election into the House.

In any event, their intent, as always, is crooked.

hombre said...

"In any event, their intent, as always, is crooked

And the legacy mediaswine are, as always, willing accomplices.

Dr Weevil said...

I don't know why anyone bothers to argue with 'GWash'. Anyone who can write "herr trump" and call someone else "a man without honor" in the very same comment is obviously impervious to reason, common sense, whatever the opposite of hypocrisy is, and yes, honor.

Sammy Finkelman said...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/11/27/trumps-bogus-claim-that-millions-of-people-voted-illegally-for-hillary-clinton

Our colleagues at Snopes.com and PundiFact have already examined this claim, back when it was hot in the right-wing blogosphere, not a statement made by a future U.S. president. The whole thing started with a few tweets by Gregg Phillips, a self-described conservative voter fraud specialist, who started making claims even before data on voter history was actually available in most jurisdictions.

These claims were then picked up by such purveyors of false facts as Infowars.com, a conspiracy-minded website that, among other things, claims that no one actually died in a massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. One article described Phillips as being affiliated with VoterFraud.org but in reality he says he is the founder of VoteStand.com, supposedly an app that detects vote fraud. Phillips also has claimed that Obamacare is the “biggest voter registration fraud scheme in the history of the world” because it provided opportunities for voter registration.


Snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/three-million-votes-in-presidential-election-cast-by-illegal-aliens/

Phillips offers no evidence whatsoever to back up the claim that he "verified" more than three million non-citizen votes. Nor does he divulge his data sources or methodology, much less explain how it was possible to "verify" three million fraudulent votes within five days of a national election. In point of fact, Phillips bluntly refuses to share this information with journalists, claiming it will be released "in open form to the American people":

Pundifact:

no-3-million-undocumented-immigrants-did-not-vote-

(It all gioes back to a tweet. No argument You can make an argument that some of this could have happened, ut you can't get any number like 3 million.)

tim in vermont said...

Snopes and Politifact are both highly partisan, despite claims to the contrary.

Matt said...

tim in vermont said..

>Snopes and Politifact are both highly partisan, despite claims to the contrary.

Care to give us some examples please? I find that when people claim something is partisan they don't have examples. They just parrot what their right wing friends say. Or do you believe in urban legends such as we didn't go to the moon?

Sammy Finkelman said...

Boxty said...11/28/16, 9:11 AM

"In 2014, a study released by a team of professors from Old Dominion University and George Mason University estimated that approximately 6.4 percent of noncitizens voted In the 2008 presidential election. They also surmised that 2.2 percent voted in the 2010 midterm election."

From: http://www.fairus.org/issue/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-u-s-elections

Based on a 2014 paper by J. Richman titled "Do non-citizens vote in U.S. elections?"

There is your proof right there. Anybody that says there is no proof is lying or willfully ignorant.


The total number of noncitizens of voting age would have to be 156,250,000 for 6.4% of them to reach 1 million.
To each 1 million,


Sammy Finkelman said...

to reach 1 million, and Trump claimed millions, which means at least 2 million, so that would mean the number of non-citizens of voting age be roughly double what we thought was the entire population of the Unite States.

Matt said...

Snopes the apparently 'partisan' site says that Trump's claim is 'unproven'. Does anyone here understand what 'unproven' means? Do I have to tell you? It primarily means it is unproven! This means that just because InfoWars says it is true and because Trump tweets it is is NOT on the face true. It means if you think it is true then PROVE it. Does anyone want to attempt to prove it or do you just follow around Trump and nod in approval at everything he tweets?

Learn to think and investigate for yourself on occasion. Go to each of these states and spend time investigating the claims. If you can't then you have no way to say it is true. Or proven.

Qwinn said...

"The total number of noncitizens of voting age would have to be 156,250,000 for 6.4% of them to reach 1 million. To each 1 million, "

Um, no. That's one spectacular math fail. You're off by a full order of magnitude (x10).

Qwinn said...

I'm guessing you multiplied by 0.0064. That's less than 1%. 6.4% is 0.064.

Math is hard.

mikeski said...

On top of which, Trump tweeted "I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally". Not "[...] the millions of illegal aliens who voted." He's apparently counting felons and multiple-voters and dead people and all the other shenanigans.

So even using 0.064 is mathing incorrectly, since that's starting from a false premise.


tim in vermont said...

Here is a "Four Pinocchio lie" according to Politifact:

On the day Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee, he resurrected a zombie claim that has previously been debunked by fact checkers. The allegation that Clinton was the first, or even one of the first, to question President Obama’s birth certificate is simply false. Trump would be on safer ground if he blamed her supporters for stoking the birther rumors, since in spring 2008, some of Clinton’s supporters began circulating anonymous emails questioning Obama’s citizenship. But there’s no evidence that Clinton or her campaign questioned Obama’s birth certificate.

It wasn't Hillary, it was her supporters!

That's a four Pinocchio lie right there!

In refusing to release his tax returns—becoming the first major candidate in 40 years to do so—Trump claimed that there is “nothing to learn” from them. Actually, tax returns would reveal a lot about Trump’s finances—and whether he is as rich as he claims. That could be a reason why he has repeatedly failed to honor promises to release his tax returns.

So they can't really prove he is lying about it, but they can make a highly partisan attack on him just the same, putting in a Hillary Campaign meme that Trump is lying about his wealth without any evidence.

Trump appears intent on dredging up every last bit of every Clinton controversy, including the 1993 death of the Clintons’ close personal friend, White House deputy counsel Vincent W. Foster Jr. He called theories of possible foul play “very serious” and the circumstances of Foster’s death “very fishy.” But there were five official investigations into Foster’s death, conducted by professional investigators, forensic experts, psychologists, doctors and independent prosecutors with unlimited resources. The fifth probe lasted three years — and still found nothing. We provided a guide to the five investigations and their findings.

So there is "NOTHING FISHY" about Vince Foster's death? It would appear that there are at least two independent claims, one from interviews of the agents who investigated the suicide, and one from a Boston Globe interview with imprisoned Hillary business associate Jim McDougal, that Hillary publicly berated Vince Foster in a meeting in front of staff, called him a "hick lawyer who would never get it." And that afterwards, his friends say that for the week between that meeting and his suicide, he was not the same Vince.

They claim to prove a negative and give four, count 'em, four Pinocchios for a claim that is supported by two sources.

Politifact was out to get Trump, plain and simple.

Let's look at how they treat Hillary:

Clinton said Trump "doesn't believe in equal pay."

Trump’s campaign website does not have a stipulated stance on equal pay for men and women, but his campaign says he supports "equal pay for equal work." Trump has said men and women doing the same job should get the same pay, but it’s hard to determine what’s "the same job," and that if everybody gets equal pay, "you get away from capitalism in a sense."

Trump has also said pay should be based on performance, not gender -- so he does appear to favor uniform payment if performance is alike.

Clinton’s statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. We rate it Half True.


So basically they found no support for Trump claiming that he does not support "equal pay for equal work" not one quote or campaign paper, nothing. But still they rate Hillary "half true" They will give Trump four Pinocchios even when, in the text, they grant that he has a point!

walter said...

"Voter fraud rarely occurs"..and "Every vote matters."
...

tim in vermont said...

Here is a lie in defense of the Democrats by Snopes:

Snopes presented the above image as a screenshot from day one of the convention, captioning it: “Contrary to claims that flags were added to the DNC’s staging only after the Democrats were criticized for not displaying any flags at the event, photographs captured U.S. flags being set up on the stage prior to the start of the convention and in place on the stage during Day 1 of the event.” In other words, Snopes — which presents itself as a credible media source for debunking lies on the internet — flat out lied.

http://www.snopes.com/flags-banned-at-dnc/

In fact, Snopes expanded the claim from "flags were absent" which was true, but they denied that, to "flags were banned" which almost nobody, except some guy on facebook nobody reads, claimed. Then when they got to the more accurate claims, they portrayed them as a climb down.

Snopes is partisan.

tim in vermont said...

Here is Snopes pretending that they couldn't understand Trump's sarcasm.

http://www.snopes.com/2016/08/11/obama-founded-isis/

Any non partisan person could clearly understand that Trump was not claiming that Obama filed documents to incorporate ISIS, naming officers, filing by-laws, etc. Snopes pretended they didn't understand that, or worse, are so partisan they could not understand that.

Alex said...

I think we can take Ann's violent reaction to The Donald's claim of millions of illegal votes as proof that she voted for Hillary.

tim in vermont said...

Snopes also claims that California requires proof of citizenship as part of their proof of age. Well, that isn't exactly what was said.

“Automated voter registration is actually a more secure way of doing things: [potential voters] have to demonstrate proof of age, the vast majority of time people are showing a birth certificate or a passport, which also reflects citizenship. That’s arguably more secure than someone checking a box under penalty of perjury,” California Secretary of State Alex Padilla told HuffPost.

No question that the vast majority of California voters are legal citizens, why not tell us the standards? How do the rest of them prove their age. There is no claim above that anybody is forced to prove their citizenship to register.

http://www.snopes.com/california-motor-voter-act/

And, sure enough, the California dmv makes no mention whatsoever of requiring proof. Just give them an SSN, a date of birth, and your California Driver's license number.

http://www.dmv.org/ca-california/voter-registration.php

Snopes is partisan, and there are many issues on which they are remarkably incurious.

tim in vermont said...

Politifact on illegals voting:

Indeed, the ability to carry off such a far-reaching conspiracy — potentially involving millions of people over the course of several months and without being noticed by election administration officials, many of them in states controlled by Republicans — is ridiculously illogical. We rate Trump’s statement Pants on Fire.

A quick look at California's Motor Voter laws with an unbiased eye would have shown Politifact that such claims are neither "ridiculously illogical" nor do they require a vast conspiracy. Just state laws rife with loopholes.

"It’s bizarre to claim that Clinton had the ability to generate millions of illegal voters but not use them to help her win the Electoral College," Masket said.

Really? Most of these lax voting laws are put in place in heavily blue states. Good luck getting them passed in swing states. Not going to happen. Only partisan blindness could prevent Politifact from seeing this simple fact.

JamesB.BKK said...

Kessler also smeared infowars.com by asserting that it made the Sandy Hook hoax claim, when it instead interviewed a person or people making that claim. It's a double-indirect smear by a "factchecker." Big surprise. Hillary did the same thing in her "alt-right" speech.

JamesB.BKK said...

" . . . and now that I'm president I will go about solving the issue by requiring nationwide Voter ID." Alas, another Republican president would move to erode what remains of federalism in the United States. Surprised!

Big Mike said...

tim in vermont is right.

However, it's time to think of what Trump said as battlespace preparation. Under the current lax procedures that are in place it's equally impossible to say definitively that the number two million is correct or that it is incorrect. We can be fairly certain that the number is greater than zero because individuals commenting on other posts claim to have seen people voting whom they knew were not legal citizens. And that's about all we really know. But now he's laid the groundwork for tightening up our voting laws, and that's a good thing.

MPH said...

"Says the Hillary voter who thinks Putin rigged the election."

Michael K - you are wrong on both counts.