Rigged...James O'Keefe's Project Veritas

[Moonshot_1]

If there was wide spread voter fraud as you say, wouldn't the crack team of bright republican or conservative groups be able to find at least some of it ? If they have, could you point it out to me ? Surely college educated investigators could sleuth it out.
[/quote]

No, this is the point I am making. It is not widespread. It doesn't have to be and is more effective if it is not.

You can then make the case that the voter fraud percentage is low. And if you are engaged in it you want it to be. You want it under the radar. You don't need to show your hand in every political race. And it need not be done in the course of a single election.

With a pretty low percentage of fraudulent votes or fraudulent election practices (to total nationwide) in pivotal close contests you can easily change the outcome.

And the point I am making, while I know the Democrat leadership is up to it's eye balls in it, is that we need to, regardless of political party or leanings, be vigilant, to vet the process at every precinct and every district and every state at every step.

No one can possibly be opposed to insuring the integrity of our election process. And when you realize how easily vulnerable it can be, when we see the constant struggle to achieve power on a Global scale and the tyranny that can be used  to gain it, we should Demand it. Whatever your politics are.

If Trump wins I will have no issue with the Clinton camp exhausting all legal challenges to ensure the integrity of the vote.

Same way with the Trump camp.

No one should be afraid of the the integrity of the process.
We need to embrace it.

The Republic cannot exist without it.

How anyone can take this lightly is beyond me.

[Alberta Patriot]

F-Six...I don't have to suggest anything...hard working people like James O'Keefe and his partners are doing an excellent job exposing the fraud and corruption...by the tone of your question, I am going to suggest that people like you just might do nothing if this was happening in your country.
I am only a very interested observer who is concerned about my friends, family and good neighbors in the USA who have to deal with the aftermath of all this after the election... no matter which way it swings. Even if Hillary wins all this corruption is simply not going away...there will be a lot of very angry people who will demand answers, and will simply not let this pass without a fight.

[baldo]

...hard working people like James O'Keefe and his partners are doing an excellent job exposing the fraud and corruption...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/03/08/james-okeefe-pays-100000-to-acorn-employee-he-smeared-conservative-media-yawns/#53c0dffc3a78

Do you mean THIS James O'Keefe?

And it looks like the trumpster was involved.....

http://www.salon.com/2016/10/21/donald-trump-foundation-paid-james-okeefe-10000-in-2015-report/

[Alberta Patriot]

The voters in the Netherlands as well as All the nations of the European Union have already given up without a fight.  They have no say in what is going on in their own countries, as they are being dictated to by an unelected and unaccountable bureauracracy in Brussels...Hillary wants something similar in the Western Hemisphere...it is all a large move to end Democracy here just like Europe.
Britain voted itself out to avoid the Brussels dictatorship.

BTW Baldo...I have engaged the ignore feature on your postings a while back. I don't read or respond so don't waste your time.  If you object to what I post...by all means do the same...I really am okay with that.
Ride Safe

[The emperor has no clothes]

The voters in the Netherlands as well as All the nations of the European Union have already given up without a fight.  They have no say in what is going on in their own countries, as they are being dictated to by an unelected and unaccountable bureauracracy in Brussels...Hillary wants something similar in the Western Hemisphere...it is all a large move to end Democracy here just like Europe.
Britain voted itself out to avoid the Brussels dictatorship.

BTW Baldo...I have engaged the ignore feature on your postings a while back. I don't read or respond so don't waste your time.

Sure you don't.

[baldo]

BTW Baldo...I have engaged the ignore feature on your postings a while back. I don't read or respond so don't waste your time.  If you object to what I post...by all means do the same...I really am okay with that.
Ride Safe

Says the Canadian as he reads and responds.....

And it's not that I object to what you post, I usually refute what you post. That seems to be what you object to....

But you'll never know, will you....

[Willow]

BTW Baldo...I have engaged the ignore feature on your postings a while back. I don't read or respond so don't waste your time.  If you object to what I post...by all means do the same...I really am okay with that.
Ride Safe

Says the Canadian as he reads and responds.....

And it's not that I object to what you post, I usually refute what you post. That seems to be what you object to....

But you'll never know, will you....

Baldo, as to the reading and responding the reading is not necessarily.  With the ignore feature activated a member will see when someone has responded but will not see the response unless he clicks on the option that says he wants to read what was ignored.

For my two cents worth (U.S.) the tiring and ultimate ignoring will take place not because of the refuting but the consistent tone of responses.  Some of us, perhaps myself included, sometimes slip out of the respectful discussion mode.

I have a tendency to believe that everyone who disagrees with me is stupid at some level.  It tends to slip through in my communication.  For some of us it is blatantly obvious.

[Moonshot_1]

...hard working people like James O'Keefe and his partners are doing an excellent job exposing the fraud and corruption...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/03/08/james-okeefe-pays-100000-to-acorn-employee-he-smeared-conservative-media-yawns/#53c0dffc3a78

Do you mean THIS James O'Keefe?

And it looks like the trumpster was involved.....

http://www.salon.com/2016/10/21/donald-trump-foundation-paid-james-okeefe-10000-in-2015-report/

Holding o'keefe to these standards are fine. But either these are the standards we hold folks to or they are not.

Hillary can't possibly meet these standards. Emails under Congressional subpoena destroyed, non secure, non government server used for classified information, Clinton Foundation foreign donations, lying about Benghazi and the list goes on and on and on.

O'keefe brings evidence to the public forum about political corruption at the highest levels.
You may choose to dismiss the evidence. But to do so is to do it at the peril of the integrity of the process. You may not like the messenger, you may be convinced the messenger is flawed.

But even if the message and messenger are flawed, the integrity of the process demands we view such evidence and do so impartially. Again, you can dismiss O'keefe's report, but what if it is right on the money? Would you let the integrity of the process be destroyed because of your political blindness?

[Alberta Patriot]

BTW Baldo...I have engaged the ignore feature on your postings a while back. I don't read or respond so don't waste your time.  If you object to what I post...by all means do the same...I really am okay with that.
Ride Safe

Says the Canadian as he reads and responds.....

And it's not that I object to what you post, I usually refute what you post. That seems to be what you object to....

But you'll never know, will you....

Baldo, as to the reading and responding the reading is not necessarily.  With the ignore feature activated a member will see when someone has responded but will not see the response unless he clicks on the option that says he wants to read what was ignored.

For my two cents worth (U.S.) the tiring and ultimate ignoring will take place not because of the refuting but the consistent tone of responses.  Some of us, perhaps myself included, sometimes slip out of the respectful discussion mode.

I have a tendency to believe that everyone who disagrees with me is stupid at some level.  It tends to slip through in my communication.  For some of us it is blatantly obvious.

Thank You...Guilty of Occasional Rants as well...and...I do however see the responses, opinions and links of ignored members once quoted by other members, but I choose to restrain myself...like I said somewhere else...responding only encourages more of the same from these individuals. Most of the responses  I see are very heavy on links and very light on dialogue so I am spared to some degree.
Again thanks for your 2 cents worth(about 3 Canadian pesos these days)

[baldo]

I have a tendency to believe that everyone who disagrees with me is stupid at some level.  It tends to slip through in my communication.  For some of us it is blatantly obvious.

I wouldn't worry about it, Willow. It doesn't happen very often.....

[baldo]

But even if the message and messenger are flawed, the integrity of the process demands we view such evidence and do so impartially. Again, you can dismiss O'keefe's report, but what if it is right on the money? Would you let the integrity of the process be destroyed because of your political blindness?

I agree, Moonshot. In a perfect world, any and all information would be trustworthy and would be viewed with impartiality. Unfortunately, the world we live in is far from that.

In the case of O'Keefe, his past history screams volumes. He wouldn't know a straight story if it bit him in the ass. Every single thing he's involved turns out to be total bullshit. The fact that people can watch his videos and actually believes them is completely amazing to me. There is so much press out there showing how he operates, but it apparently doesn't matter. If you only get your info from a particular source, I guess you won't see it.

If I'm wrong about this latest batch of tripe from him, I'll admit it. Are you willing to do the same?

[G-Man]

If there was wide spread voter fraud as you say, wouldn't the crack team of bright republican or conservative groups be able to find at least some of it ? If they have, could you point it out to me ? Surely college educated investigators could sleuth it out.

No, this is the point I am making. It is not widespread. It doesn't have to be and is more effective if it is not.

You can then make the case that the voter fraud percentage is low. And if you are engaged in it you want it to be. You want it under the radar. You don't need to show your hand in every political race. And it need not be done in the course of a single election.

With a pretty low percentage of fraudulent votes or fraudulent election practices (to total nationwide) in pivotal close contests you can easily change the outcome.

And the point I am making, while I know the Democrat leadership is up to it's eye balls in it, is that we need to, regardless of political party or leanings, be vigilant, to vet the process at every precinct and every district and every state at every step.

No one can possibly be opposed to insuring the integrity of our election process. And when you realize how easily vulnerable it can be, when we see the constant struggle to achieve power on a Global scale and the tyranny that can be used  to gain it, we should Demand it. Whatever your politics are.

If Trump wins I will have no issue with the Clinton camp exhausting all legal challenges to ensure the integrity of the vote.

Same way with the Trump camp.

No one should be afraid of the the integrity of the process.
We need to embrace it.

The Republic cannot exist without it.

How anyone can take this lightly is beyond me.
[/quote]


They're only taking it likely because their candidate it out front.  If she loses, it'll be another story.

And, if the candidates pasts were switched, everything that is no big deal, would be a HYUUUGE deal.  And we wouldn't hear stupid replies like "Well, all politicians lie" or "Oh yea, tell me what she was convicted of".  Hypocrites.