Earlier today I showed a number of examples which should convince just about any reasonable person that voter fraud, far from being non-existent, is alive, well….and thriving in these midterm elections.
John Fund\’s latest column for nationalreview.com talks about one of the examples I featured – a video from James O\’Keefe\’s Project Veritas, in which several Democrat campaign workers in Colorado provide chapter and verse of how it is done.
He goes into far greater detail than I did, and I strongly recommend you use this link and read his entire commentary.
But, for the meanwhile, here are two particularly important paragraphs:
(Colorado\’s) Secretaryof State Gessler had futile arguments with Democratic statelegislators last year who insisted on ramming a bill through thatmandated Colorado become the only state in the nation with bothall-mail balloting and same-day registration. Under same-dayregistration someone can register to vote online, have a mail ballotsent to them, and never physically show up to register or vote. Otherplaces that use same-day registration treat the vote as a provisionalballot pending verification. Colorado immediately counts the vote andthere is no way to separate it out if the person who votes is laterfound ineligible. “We know people in other states with betterintegrity safeguards have cheated using the cover of these methods,”Gessler told me. A decade ago, Melody Rose, then a liberal professorat Oregon State University, concluded that state\’s vote-by-mailsystem “brings a perpetual risk of systemic fraud” in electionswith razor-thin margins.
“Voterfraud is incredibly difficult to detect and prosecute, absent adirect confession,” Gessler says as he notes that in other areas oflaw-breaking, we do not judge how much of it there is merely by thenumber of related prosecutions. But he also notes there is evidenceof just how easy voter fraud is to commit. Last December, New YorkCity\’s Department of Investigation detailed how its undercoveragents claimed at 63 polling places to be individuals who were infact dead, had moved out of town, or who were in jail. In 61instances, or 97 percent of the time, they were allowed to vote. (Toavoid skewing results, they voted only for nonexistent write-incandidates.) How did the city\’s Board of Elections respond? Did itimmediately probe and reform their sloppy procedures? Not at all. Itinstead demanded that the investigators be prosecuted. Most officialsare loath to admit how vulnerable election systems are, but privatelymany express worry that close elections could be flipped by fraud.
Based on this account, and many others I have put up over over the past several years, I know with absolute certainty that voter fraud exists. In some places, I suspect it not only exists but is rampant.
And who is perpetrating the fraud?
Well, when we talk about corruption, what is the operative recommendation? “Follow the money”.
When we talk about voter fraud, it seems to me the operative recommendation is “See who fights against voter IDs”. Keep that in mind and the answer becomes simple to determine:
-Show me a political party which demands people identify themselves before voting, and I will show you a party that wants only legal voters to cast ballots.
-Show me a political party which demands people not identify themselves before voting, so there is no way to check that they have a right to do so, and I will show you a party that wants an open door for non-legal voters to cast ballots.
Do we have two such political parties right now? I doubt you need me to tell you.
