Oh, and about that foreign-influences-on-the-elections thing
We have ballot harvesting by DREAMERS in California:
Voting up until now has been a practice reserved for citizens. Today, non-citizens vote – by getting hold of indifferent Americans and in a perfectly legal setup in California, filling in the ballots by proxy, with no fingerprints visible. Who knows what kind of coercion may be employed by some of them?
And even more disturbingly, if DREAMers can do that to promote their own political agenda, what’s to stop other foreigners, with far more malign agendas, from doing it?
This has been going on for years. The US Attorneys in CA and other states should prosecute.
Scalia explained the technique in an Opinion.
.
Ballot harvesting is a growing technique, especially in California but may have been used in Arizona in the Senate race. Mail in ballots are very susceptible and Oregon and Washington are 100% mail in. I expect those states, including California, to remain Democrat strongholds. I am concerned about Arizona.
More malign than the “Dreamers”? But subverting an election is malign, period. No one’s going to give their ballot to Ahmadinejads. That nice “Dreamer,” on the other hand, just wants to be helpful…. And then his black-sheep uncle can cut your neighbor’s throat; or maybe yours, or your niece’s.
“Foreign influence” is, alas, not the problem.
It is, however, the perfect scapegoat magnificently manipulated by domestic evil-doers. (And it’s great for cover-ups!)
Evil? Actual, heh, “Evil”? Come on. Anyone who isn’t a half-witted rube, a paranoid medieval kook or a superstitious, cult-embracing nut-case knows that “evil” simply doesn’t exist! How can one be so dim-wittedly simplistic?… I mean, it’s the 21st century!
In fact, yes, evil…:
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/423558-exculpatory-russia-evidence-about-mike-flynn-that-us-intel-kept-secret
Ballot harvesting, early voting, and absentee voting, in practice, all serve to undermine the fundamental principle of democracy. They should be outlawed.
Voter fraud is a serious issue. President Trump was right to address it early in his administration. The Ruling Class stonewalling was depressing to watch. His decision to drop it was a terrible mistake for his administration and the American people.
RE: That sinking feeling that things are slipping away. [earlier post]
1. Civics and civility are becoming relics of the past.
2. Free speech and privacy are being curtailed.
3. Unrestrained corporate power is becoming the norm.
4. The Justice system is being politicized as never before.
5. Voter fraud is going to get much worse: people are being disenfranchised through fraud.
6. Even if the People manage to elect someone who is interested in their views, nothing changes.
In many areas (e.g. industrial policy, foreign policy, immigration) the views of the Ruling Class are opposed by the People. The Ruling Class doesn’t care. I’ve come to the conclusion that the act of voting is a sham.
What happens when people get the idea that their basic human rights aren’t being respected; that their government is not responding to their needs; that their leaders are ignorant and oblivious; and that the People cannot affect change through peaceful means?
Democrats, as I recall, refused President Trump’s offer of amnesty for all 2.5 million DACA members and Dreamers in the previous immigration bill. Dreamers sabotaged themselves by pushing the uncommitted to vote Democrat.
Democrats, as I recall, refused President Trump’s offer of amnesty for all 2.5 million DACA members and Dreamers in the previous immigration bill.
Trump, himself, has explained what happened. The 9th Circuit ruled that DACA was not subject to deportation. The Democrats instantly stopped negotiating. Why negotiate when the court have them what they wanted. He is waiting for the Supreme Court to overturn that decision. If they do, and we should hope they do, the Democrats will be back at the table. That’s if Roberts doesn’t go Souter on us.
Mike K:
I’m curious why a lower court (9th Circuit) can stop the President from ending a program that the Supreme Court previously ruled unconstitutional.
I am no authority on the history. I recall Obama saying he could not do it by EO, before doing it by EO. I do not know a history of the USSC deciding on this.
This explains it. The USSC tied 4 to 4 and that leaves the lower court ruling in place.