Let’s pretend for a minute that the leadership of the Democratic Party actually wants what is best for legal Americans. Let’s pretend that they actually believe in fair, democratic elections unimpeded by schemes to give one party an illegal advantage. Under these premises, wouldn’t an investigation into the prevalence of voter fraud be unequivocally good for America, a nation preserved only by the merits which a true democracy provides?
One would think that rooting out instances which allow for illegal voting would be a bipartisan cause, right? After all, the undermining of the democratic voting process is perhaps the most direct threat to America’s sovereignty that there is.
Yet, Senate Minority Leader and de-facto Democratic spokesperson Chuck Schumer had this to say about a mere investigation into the magnitude of voter fraud in America:
"The voter integrity commission is a punishment in search of a transgression that never happened," Schumer said. "If there were overwhelming evidence of fraud, obviously we'd have to do something, but there isn't. ... The election integrity commission ought to be disbanded. We will be looking for ways to do that legislatively."
Schumer proposes disbanding the commission before it even gets started. Schumer vows to do all he can as a lawmaker to fight this serious effort to look into voter fraud. Upon examination of the facts, it is no wonder why Schumer is so passionate about this issue. There is substantial evidence of voter fraud, both on the micro and macro levels, and indications are that it has favored Democrats to an extent that few realized was even possible.
Voter fraud is not some mythical phenomenon made up by the President to accelerate his immigration agenda, as Schumer would have you believe. Instances of voter fraud are many, and they are well-documented. In Colorado, numerous dead citizens somehow casted votes in a district that is tightly contested. A similar case of votes filed under the names of dead citizens occurred in Virginia. The Texas Attorney General was forced to investigate the practice of ‘vote harvesting’:
‘The perpetrators order mail-in ballots by forging the names of citizens in target districts. They then hire kindly middle-aged and older women to go door-to-door with those ballots in hand. They knock on the door of the citizen whose ballot they have, and make fraudulent claims as to why they are visiting. They may claim they are gathering signatures for a petition, or beg for a signature so they might “meet their quota” for whatever alleged cause they are soliciting on behalf of. Frequently, it is something like “Republicans are trying to take away the rights of black voters.”
The citizen then unknowingly signs the yellow ballot carrier envelope that contains their ballot – a ballot the perpetrators have already filled out that supports their candidate.’ (Townhall)
This particular case in the Fort Worth area of Texas was the largest that the Texas Attorney General had seen, and it affected ‘several voting cycles.' Regular old citizens are not motivated or capable enough to formulate and enact such widespread voter corruption schemes. Rest assured, these schemes are meant to significantly aid one party in particular– the one that will go to war over preventing voter ID laws– and there is little doubt that Democratic leadership has their hands in organizing such fraudulent efforts.
After all, is it even conceivable that Hillary Clinton could have sniffed a popular vote victory by legitimate means? She is the rare candidate whose hate-ability pervaded voters on both sides of the political spectrum. Without the coveted dead vote that has been exposed across the nation throughout several election cycles, who knows how Democrats would be faring.
So it is no coincidence or secret why Democrats continue to spout the bold-faced lie that voter fraud is not a problem. They posit that Republicans are racist for attempting to install even the most basic forms of identity-verification methods. One example of this racist motive, they say, is Donald Trump’s allegation that 3 to 5 million illegal votes were cast in the 2016 election cycle. It was, in many Republicans’ minds, the only way that the election did not result in an even more decisive victory for Trump.
Immediately, the usual suspects in the media condemned his allegation as false, baseless, and inflammatory, citing those convenient studies and sources that always seem to back up their opinions. When in doubt, just ask Verrit, right?
But seriously, once-trustworthy sources such as the AP rushed to discredit Trump’s cited numbers as false. Predictably, Google searches are dominated by other long-compromised ‘news’ sources that follow the AP’s lead. However, seasoned researchers know that the first couple pages of a Google search rarely yield a balanced or fair portrayal of a given topic when it comes to politics or current events, and this is the case with illegal voting in the 2016 election.
Eventually, one will get to a Washington Times article which not only seems to confirm by inference Trump’s numbers, but takes it a step further. The facts show that Trump’s high-water estimate of 5 million illegal votes cast was likely too conservative. But it was not the 2016 election that the study focused on. It was Barack Obama’s 2008 victory which apparently was won on the backs of an estimated 5.7 million illegally cast votes.
The well-respected, widely-cited New Jersey-based research group Just Facts relied partially upon a study conducted by Old Dominion University professors as a basis for their own findings. That study, along with others, have found that the issue of voter fraud is significant:
‘a 2012 study from the Pew Center on the States estimated that one out of every eight voter registrations is inaccurate, out-of-date or duplicate. About 2.8 million people are registered in more than one state, according to the study, and 1.8 million registered voters are dead…’ (Heritage Foundation)
Even the Democratic Election Commissioner for New York City, Alan Schulkin, admitted on video that the problem is rampant, despite the party’s official claims that it is nonexistent, commissioning studies that say as much. Unaware that he was being recorded, Schulkin felt liberated to speak the truth, and he did.
“Yeah, they should ask for your ID. I think there is a lot of voter fraud,” Schulkin said. He elaborated on the methods used by his party to facilitate this widespread fraud, damning evidence of a coordinated effort to sway elections illegally. “You know, I don’t think it’s too much to ask somebody to show some kind of an ID…Like I say, people don’t realize, certain neighborhoods in particular they bus people around to vote,” he added.
Voter fraud has apparently become so integral to the Democrats’ approach that even the success of their policies seems dependent upon the illegally cast vote. An article published in the Journal of Electoral Studies reached several conclusions which carry massive implications:
- Non-citizens favor Democratic candidates over Republican candidates.
- Non-citizen voting likely changed 2008 outcomes including Electoral College votes and the composition of Congress
- Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress
This is a huge deal. The 2008 election itself can be thought to be compromised, as well as the massive array of transformative legislation– including the Affordable Care Act– that was passed, apparently, with major assistance from illegal votes.
Seriously, take a moment to consider the magnitude of these conclusions. Unearthing more direct evidence of who facilitated these illegal votes would likely expose democracy-altering criminality by the Democratic party. This is what these studies tell us. It is plain to see how such massive corruption has been carried out, too.
The charges that voter-ID laws are racist have resulted in 20 states where no ID at all is required to cast a vote. Showing an ID before voting is not racist. To assert that minorities are somehow incapable of keeping some form of identification on them is condescending as all hell. The dichotomy between this actually racist, condescending view of minorities and reality is perfectly illustrated in this video from Ami Horowitz:
Minorities, almost without fail, carry IDs on them just as anyone else does. Yet, Democrats claim that asking them to show an ID while voting is somehow creating an obstacle that they could not possibly overcome. It is preposterous, and the narrative has a solitary aim: to preserve the massive amount of fraud that Democrats have employed for who knows how long.
And it explains why Chuck Schumer is so ostensibly panicked by the formation of a commission tasked with investigating voter fraud. It explains why Republicans are so eager to stamp out voter fraud, while Democrats use race-based lies to prevent even the most basic of identification checks at the voting booth.
It is all too obvious.
Voter fraud is a major problem in the American democratic system, too many studies and fact-based reports have shown this for a rational person to believe otherwise. And the endgame of Democrats’ railing against voter-ID laws is also blatantly clear.
May the recently formed commission act swiftly, as Democrats’ have surely been fortifying efforts to round up more fraudulent votes in order to ensure that a repeat of 2016 does not occur. It is part of why there is so little change or shakeup within the party ranks.
A majority of Americans are not going to vote for Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris. But, unless serious action continues to be taken toward exposing the voter fraud we know to be rampant, they may not need a majority of actual Americans to vote for them in order to secure victory.
Whether you are a Democrat or Republican, the prospect of a potentially rigged election must be taken seriously. Though it is the Democratic party that clearly has gained from and facilitated this fraud– their own NYC voting commissioner admitted as much– every American should understand that the implications of voter fraud on either side of the aisle are massive.