• Home
  • Elections/Vote Fraud

Court: Electoral College Members Not Bound By Popular Vote


A U.S. appeals court in Denver said Electoral College members can vote for the presidential candidate of their choice and aren’t bound by the popular vote in their states. The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that the Colorado secretary of state violated the Constitution in 2016 when he removed an elector and nullified his vote because the elector refused to cast his ballot for Democrat Hillary Clinton, who won the popular vote.

The ruling applies only to Colorado and five other states in the 10th Circuit: Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming.

It could influence future cases nationwide in the unlikely event that enough Electoral College members strayed from their states’ popular vote to affect the outcome of a presidential election, constitutional scholars said.

RELATED: Thousands Of Signatures Collected In Effort To Repeal National Popular Vote Law

The Electoral College system is established in the Constitution. When voters cast a ballot for president, they are actually choosing members of the Electoral College, called electors, who are pledged to that presidential candidate. The electors then choose the president.

Electors almost always vote for the popular vote winner, and some states have laws requiring them to do so.

But the split decision by a three-judge panel on the Denver appeals court said the Constitution allows electors to cast their votes at their own discretion. “The state does not possess countervailing authority to remove an elector and to cancel his vote in response to the exercise of that Constitutional right,” the ruling said.

The elector at the center of the case, Micheal Baca, was part of a group known as “Hamilton electors” who tried to convince electors who were pledged to Clinton or Donald Trump to unite behind a consensus candidate to deny Trump the presidency.

After a flurry of filings in state and federal courts, the electors met on Dec. 19, 2016, and Baca crossed out Clinton’s name on his ballot and wrote in John Kasich, the Republican governor of Ohio who also ran for president.

Then-Secretary of State Wayne Williams refused to count the vote and removed Baca as an elector. He replaced him with another elector who voted for Clinton.

Colorado’s current secretary of state, Jena Griswold, decried the ruling Tuesday in Colorado but did not immediately say if she would appeal.

“This court decision takes power from Colorado voters and sets a dangerous precedent,” she said. “Our nation stands on the principle of one person, one vote.”

Baca’s attorneys said the U.S. Supreme Court will likely hear the case because it conflicts with a decision from Washington state’s Supreme Court. That court said in May that electors could be fined for not casting ballots for the popular vote winner.

Constitutional scholars were skeptical, saying a conflicting opinion from a state court system has less influence on the Supreme Court than one from another federal appeals court. No other federal appeals court is believed to have ruled in a similar case.

“The court just might think this isn’t something that demands our attention right now,” said Michael Morley, a professor at the Florida State University College of Law.

The court ruling in Denver could be important if a future Electoral College is so closely divided that a handful of “faithless electors” change the outcome by casting a ballot contrary to the popular vote, said Ned Foley, a professor at Ohio State University’s law school.

“This opinion would be taken very seriously,” he said. “It would be considered judicial precedent.”

But that kind of split in the Electoral College is unlikely, said Morley.

“So many individually unlikely events would have to fall in place for that,” he said.

Hundreds of electors have cast votes in the history of the nation, “and only a handful have been cast by faithless electors,” Morley said.

It wasn’t immediately clear what impact the ruling would have on a new Colorado law that pledges the state’s Electoral College votes to the winner of the national popular vote if enough other states with a total of at least 270 electoral votes do the same.

It would ensure the winner of the popular vote wins the Electoral College and becomes president.

Tuesday’s ruling could undermine the law by prohibiting the state from requiring electors to vote for the popular vote winner, said Frank McNulty, an adviser to Protect Colorado’s Vote, which wants voters to overturn the law. But the ruling could also free electors to decide on their own to support the candidate with the most votes nationally, he said.

“It is a double-edge decision,” he said.

 

 

Continue Reading

Video: How Google Will ‘Actively Interfere’ in 2020 Elections

(Exactly How! Trump must act to save this nation from the left)


ALERT AMERICA: A researcher who has spent more than half a decade monitoring Google’s influence said he believes the tech giant will “actively interfere” in the 2020 elections/

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Liberal Professor Warns: Google Manipulating Voters 'on a Massive Scale'


Dr. Robert Epstein told Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Tuesday that Google can manipulate votes by using tools that they have at their disposal exclusively, and that no one can counteract them. Epstein warned the senator of big tech election meddling during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on "Google and Censorship through Search Engines" on Tuesday.

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: The Incredible Victimhood of Kamala Harris

Will the oppression of the privileged millionaire never end?


This new edition of The Glazov Gang features the Daniel Greenfield Moment with Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Daniel focuses on The Incredible Victimhood of Kamala Harris, and he asks: Will the oppression of the privileged millionaire never end?

Don’t miss it!

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Nearly 1 Million Californians Registered to Vote Are Ineligible, Says Non-Partisan Group


By Alice Salles
TheEpochTimes.com

A non-partisan group has reported that there are still several counties in California where the number of registered voters is greater than the number of eligible citizens, with the total nearing one million people.

The Election Integrity Project California (EIPCa) stated in a release on July 8 (pdf) that if voter problems are not promptly addressed by state officials, fraudulent election activities may continue to haunt the state.

Using the state’s own data on active and inactive status registrants, the organization found that eight counties have not cleaned up their inactive registrant lists, despite a 2018 legal settlement that requires California counties to properly maintain their voter rolls and remove inactive voters according to federal law.

According to EIPCa, there are currently 991,411 people registered who are ineligible to vote. This is a staggering increase of 928,035 persons over the group’s 2017 report.

As the number of names with inactive status continues to grow, the organization noted that these excess registrants open up the doors to fraud.

Voter registration rates that exceed the eligible population range from 103% in Ventura, San Benito, and Plumas counties to 115% in San Diego. Other counties include San Mateo at 104%, Solano and Santa Cruz at 107%, and Los Angeles at 109%.

Just months ago, the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) acknowledged making 105,000 registration errors, with at least one noncitizen claiming the DMV improperly added him to the voter rolls.

In an interview with The Epoch Times, EIPCa Chief Analyst Ellen Swensen confirmed that the DMV’s practices still need improvement, although the EIPCa doesn’t have a way of finding out who is or isn’t a citizen by just looking at their voter registrations.

In addition to the errors made by the DMV, she said, people who are ineligible to vote might also be getting registration forms from people who are paid to register voters and who might be unaware of the law.

“This can harm [immigrants’] future chances of gaining citizenship, so it’s important that non-citizens become educated about this,” she said. Furthermore, there are “thousands of duplicated [and ineligible] registrations” that can be used during elections “with or without the person’s knowledge.”

Recently, nine people were accused of offering cash or cigarettes in exchange for forged signatures on voter registration forms and petitions in Los Angeles. Prosecutors claim the group was active during the 2016 and 2018 election cycles, targeting the homeless to help them register fictitious persons.

EIPCa says this type of abuse may have been enabled by the state’s voting laws.

“Because California does not require an ID for a person to vote, and because some counties include the names of inactive registrants on their publicly-displayed Election Day rosters, anyone can claim to be the inactive registrant and receive a ballot,” Swensen said.

“All that is required is an oath (verbal or signed) that they are who they say they are.”

Swensen said officials need to do more to fix this problem.

“EIPCa would like to see counties become more proactive with list maintenance by mailing a card to every registrant on the list, not just those with inactive status,” she explained.

“This would allow all registrants to update their information and would, for those who have moved, died, etc., begin the lawful [process of inactivation and cancellation]. This would go a long way to reduce the almost 1 million ineligibles currently on CA’s list.”

In early 2019, the Sacramento Bee reported that Secretary of State Alex Padilla’s office was investigating whether noncitizens had voted in the June 2018 primary. At the time, Padilla admitted that voters were losing their trust in the system due to registration errors, echoing others such as State Sen. John Moorlach (R-Costa Mesa), who said that despite his “high level of confidence in California’s election systems,” he knew that the state should “do more to assure the voters that the system doesn’t have holes in it and that the boat isn’t leaking.”

Meanwhile, in November 2018, San Francisco became the largest city in the United State to give noncitizens the chance to vote in a local election. While the city’s move did not impact any election in the state or federal levels, some believe that the trend could spread to the rest of the state, and errors could continue to occur.

“Noncitizen voting is a very contentious issue,” said Robin Hvidston, executive director of We the People Rising, a Claremont organization that lobbies for stricter immigration enforcement, at the time, according to the Los Angeles Times. “The move to extend voting rights to those illegally residing in San Francisco has the potential to backfire among citizens with a moderate stance on illegal immigration.”

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Facebook Founder Mark Zuckerberg Admits Meddling in Irish Election


Listen to this cretin, matter-of-factly admitting his company meddled in an Irish election by blocking pro-life ads from being seen by voters. Just fine to show pro-abortion ads. And his "echo chamber" presumption is pro-life ads are some kind of speech that has to be suppressed, that pro-life views are "bad."

Bottom line is, Zuckerberg makes it very clear they meddle in elections AROUND THE WORLD by censoring content they don't want voters to see.

 

 
 
 
  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Google Influenced Midterm Elections, May Have Cost Republicans Seats: Study


ZeroHedge.com

New research reveals that Google built biases into its search results that influenced the 2018 midterm elections - possibly costing Republicans three congressional districts

First things first - the study was conducted by Dr. Robert Epstein - a San Diego-based Harvard Ph.D. who founded the Cambridge Center for Behavioral Studies. He's also a Senior Research Psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology (AIBRT), a UCSD visiting scholar, and served as editor-in-chief of Psychology Today. 

He also supported Hillary Clinton in 2016 (just like Google!).

Down to the findings: 

Epstein and AIBRT analyzed Google searches linked to three highly competitive southern California congressional races in which Democrats won, and found that Google's "clear democrat bias" may have flipped the seats away from Republican candidates. According to the study, at least 35,455 undecided voters within the three California districts may have been persuaded to vote Democrat due to the biased Google search results. 

Epstein says that in the days leading up to the 2018 midterms, he was able to preserve “more than 47,000 election-related searches on Google, Bing, and Yahoo, along with the nearly 400,000 web pages to which the search results linked.”

Analysis of this data showed a clear pro-Democrat bias in election-related Google search results as compared to competing search engines. Users performing Google searches related to the three congressional races the study focused on were significantly more likely to see pro-Democrat stories and links at the top of their results.

As Epstein’s previous studies have shown, this can have a huge impact on the decisions of undecided voters, who often assume that their search results are unbiased. Epstein has called this the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME). -Breitbart

 

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

Video: Dems Pave Way For Illegal Voters As Trump Demands More Border Money

Border crisis must be addressed


If anyone is manufacturing facts concerning border security it is the leftist train wreck known as the Democratic Party.

The numbers the Democrats choose to ignore are staggering.

“The number of families snared trying to sneak into the U.S. soared by 50 percent in one month alone, setting an all-time record with more than 36,000 family members apprehended, Homeland Security officials announced Tuesday,” as reported by the Washington Times.

It is difficult to ignore the preferential consideration the illegal alien that murdered Mollie Tibbetts is receiving or the Somali gangs turning the streets of Minneapolis into a war zone.

 

MORE YOUTUBE CENSORSHIP!
YOU CANNOT KNOW THIS INFO ACCORDING TO YOUTUBE!


 
 
 

 

 

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)

How Ballot Harvesting Corrupts Elections


By Ned Ryan
AmGreatness.com

 

People think the real problems with the integrity of our elections involve non-citizens voting, or lack of photo ID, or voter rolls needing to be cleaned, or ballot box stuffing. While those are all problems, people are missing the elephant quietly sitting in the corner of the room.

The real threat moving forward is the practice of ballot harvesting.

Observers of our elections know something fishy went on in Orange County, California and in Arizona last fall, and they know that there are strange happenings in North Carolina. For most, however, the details remain fuzzy. These happenings have to do with the practice of ballot harvesting: that is, the practice of having union members or partisan volunteers coordinate and go house to house to pick up absentee ballots that haven’t been returned and then drop those ballots off at a polling place or precinct board within the voter’s correct jurisdiction.

Mind you, these volunteers or activists don’t have to be election officials. They can be literally anyone. It feels like a complete understatement to ask, but what could possibly go wrong in this scenario? In a word, everything.

When you put millions of ballots into an un-secure environment, for days on end, in the hands of partisan activists, you’re begging for shenanigans and potential vote manipulation. Imagine for a second Granny Smith opening her door to find Teamsters or the Black Panthers standing there saying, “You’re on our list and we’re here to talk about your ballot. Why don’t you hand it over and we’ll take care of it for you.” Implausible? Nope, because ballot harvesting is basically the old-fashioned urban machine way of getting voters to the polls: you send hooligans out to stand over voters while they dutifully vote for Tammany Hall.

Continue Reading

  • Currently 0.00/5
Rating: 0.00/5 (0 votes cast)