And you libs claimed Illegal aliens are not voting.

[reason10]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/all-15-arizona-counties-sued-for-failing-to-remove-illegal-aliens-from-voter-rolls?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

All 15 Arizona Counties Sued For Failing To Remove Illegal Aliens From Voter Rolls

America First Legal filed a lawsuit today against all 15 Arizona counties for failing to remove illegal immigrants from the state’s voter rolls.

The conservative legal organization initially told the counties in July that it would take legal action if they failed to remove illegal immigrants from the voter rolls, but now America First Legal said that the counties have failed in their obligation to safeguard the election.

“We are taking emergency action to secure our elections. In addition to Maricopa, we are now suing 14 additional counties in Arizona for refusing to remove illegal aliens and non-citizens from their voter rolls,” America First Legal President Stephen Miller said. “America First Legal will do everything in its power to fight mass illegal alien voting and foreign interference in our democracy.”

“Every county in AZ is flagrantly defying its duty under state law to expunge illegal voters,” America First Legal said in a post on X.

Are you libs just plain dishonest or flagrantly STUPID?

[gatomontes99]

If there was no cheating, the democrats wouldn't be mad about stopping cheating.

[robosmith]

4 hours ago, reason10 said:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/all-15-arizona-counties-sued-for-failing-to-remove-illegal-aliens-from-voter-rolls?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=dwbrand

All 15 Arizona Counties Sued For Failing To Remove Illegal Aliens From Voter Rolls

America First Legal filed a lawsuit today against all 15 Arizona counties for failing to remove illegal immigrants from the state’s voter rolls.

The conservative legal organization initially told the counties in July that it would take legal action if they failed to remove illegal immigrants from the voter rolls, but now America First Legal said that the counties have failed in their obligation to safeguard the election.

“We are taking emergency action to secure our elections. In addition to Maricopa, we are now suing 14 additional counties in Arizona for refusing to remove illegal aliens and non-citizens from their voter rolls,” America First Legal President Stephen Miller said. “America First Legal will do everything in its power to fight mass illegal alien voting and foreign interference in our democracy.”

“Every county in AZ is flagrantly defying its duty under state law to expunge illegal voters,” America First Legal said in a post on X.

Are you libs just plain dishonest or flagrantly STUPID?

Filing a lawsuit doesn't prove the rolls contained non-citizen registries, nor that they voted.

Let us know when you find PROOF of YOUR CLAIM. Duh

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

If there was no cheating, the democrats wouldn't be mad about stopping cheating.

No cheating proven. Duh

[CdnFox]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Filing a lawsuit doesn't prove the rolls contained non-citizen registries, nor that they voted.

If the evidence wasn't at least compelling that they in fact did then it would be dismissed as frivolous

[gatomontes99]

31 minutes ago, robosmith said:

No cheating proven. Duh

Innocent people say they didn't do it. Guilty people say you can't prove it.

[CdnFox]

11 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Innocent people say they didn't do it. Guilty people say you can't prove it.

and robosmith says FOSLIES DUNNINGKRUGER COGNITAVE DISSONENCE NO FACTS OPINION DOESN"T MATTER NAKED LINK TROLL!!!!!!!    Pudding. 

So there!  

I just saved us all having to read his next 12 posts. 

[herbie]

GOP logic targets dupes like reason10.
You don't have to prove shit,you just claim it repeatedly. Witness years of DonOld's 'Crooked Biden' slander.
As for claiming that merely filing a lawsuit 'proves' dick shit.....

but  then again you are the deplorables backing a criminal pervert proven liar and fraud for President.

[Matthew]

If I filed a lawsuit against Arizona for failing to stop republican voters from pooping into the voting machines, that would definitely mean republicans are doing that, right?

Edited September 9 by Matthew

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

GOP logic targets dupes like reason10.
You don't have to prove shit,you just claim it repeatedly. Witness years of DonOld's 'Crooked Biden' slander.
As for claiming that merely filing a lawsuit 'proves' dick shit.....

but  then again you are the deplorables backing a criminal pervert proven liar and fraud for President.

if you called the pot any blacker kiddo we'd have to arrest you for hate crimes  

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, Matthew said:

If I filed a lawsuit against Arizona for failing to stop republican voters from pooping into the voting machines, that would definitely mean republicans are doing that, right?

If the lawsuit was allowed to proceed it would mean there must be SOME evidence of it. As the saying goes you can sue someone for eating a ham sandwich, but there needs to have been a sandwich. 

And if you take the time and energy and money to file a suit, then you probably have reasonably good reason to believe it was republicans that did it.  You could be wrong, or maybe the evidence doesn't turn out to be that great, but you didn't pony up that cash without a reason. 

Meanwhile you and yours insisted russian collusion was gospel just because there was an investigation underway, never mind a trial  

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

Innocent people say they didn't do it. Guilty people say you can't prove it.

People who don't know say there's NO EVIDENCE. ^You OTOH pretend your suspicions are "facts." 🤮

 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

People who don't know say there's NO EVIDENCE. ^You OTOH pretend your suspicions are "facts." 🤮

 

But there is evidence. That's the point. 

[reason10]

6 hours ago, herbie said:

GOP logic targets dupes like reason10.
You don't have to prove shit,you just claim it repeatedly. Witness years of DonOld's 'Crooked Biden' slander.
As for claiming that merely filing a lawsuit 'proves' dick shit.....

but  then again you are the deplorables backing a criminal pervert proven liar and fraud for President.

I didn't back Biden,who is a criminal, a pervert and a proven LIAR.

[Chrissy1979]

But if illegal aliens are such horrible people, wouldn't they vote for Trump anyway? He did, after all, kill the bipartisan border deal that would have stopped them from coming. He also distracted all efforts at the border by putting all the resources into a totally useless wall, making it easier for them to get in.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Chrissy1979 said:

But if illegal aliens are such horrible people, wouldn't they vote for Trump anyway? He did, after all, kill the bipartisan border deal that would have stopped them from coming. He also distracted all efforts at the border by putting all the resources into a totally useless wall, making it easier for them to get in.

The border deal would have let them cross in even larger numbers.  It would just have provided recourses to help escort them more safely.  So no, they big mad. 

but unlike you and the democrats even if they were going to vote for "their side", republicans wouldn't want that because it's not lawful.  Whereas democrats can't understand why just because something is not lawful you shouldn't support it if it benefits you. 

[Chrissy1979]

Now you're just lying and you're not even good at it. It included the strongest border restrictions ever. Trump told the Republicans to vote no so the country could have the chaos he needs to win. That's all he cares about.

[impartialobserver]

yes. some do vote however very few. Is it possible to give exact totals with supporting name, address, and phone number? No. Voting is not the first thing on their mind.. I worked with them years ago. Their sole aim in coming here is not voting for some random Democrat that they do not know nor care about. 

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Now you're just lying and you're not even good at it. It included the strongest border restrictions ever.

LOL nonesense!!  REMAIN was the strongest border restrictions ever and biden canceled that    Did you forget?

The bill was crap entirely which is why it got shot down. Simple truth. You can't fool the people at the border and they weren't supportive of it and they're not leaping up to vote for kammy either. 

Quote

Trump told the Republicans to vote no so the country could have the chaos he needs to win. That's all he cares about.

He already had the chaos. By the time that bill was even shot down there had been more illegal crossings the year before in 2023 than there had been in trumps ENTIRE TERM IN OFFICE. 

It was a junk bill that would have made things worse dressed up so that biden could pretend he'd "solved the border" and it got shot down. 

Did you have a different lie you'd like to try to promote? Maybe claim that trump promised blood in the streets if he lost or something?    i hear he scored an eagle on the golf course the other day, maybe you could say he shoots bald eagles?  

[CdnFox]

19 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

yes. some do vote however very few. Is it possible to give exact totals with supporting name, address, and phone number? No. Voting is not the first thing on their mind.. I worked with them years ago. Their sole aim in coming here is not voting for some random Democrat that they do not know nor care about. 

But this goes back to what I've talked about many times, how can anyone have faith in the system while they know there is some level of election tampering and they don't know how much? Once we realized that it's happening there's no way to quantify your statement that most aren't interested. Does that mean there's enough interested to make a difference in some areas? How many exactly is "Most"?

America will continue to decline and their society and nation will continue to erode if people do not have faith in their democracy. And they can't have faith in their democracy if the system allows for significant fraud without detection. Which it does now. In Canada at least we can say " There's probably SOME fraud but if it was enough to make a difference we'd know".  And for the most part that's true.  You can't say that in the states. 

[impartialobserver]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

But this goes back to what I've talked about many times, how can anyone have faith in the system while they know there is some level of election tampering and they don't know how much? Once we realized that it's happening there's no way to quantify your statement that most aren't interested. Does that mean there's enough interested to make a difference in some areas? How many exactly is "Most"?

America will continue to decline and their society and nation will continue to erode if people do not have faith in their democracy. And they can't have faith in their democracy if the system allows for significant fraud without detection. Which it does now. In Canada at least we can say " There's probably SOME fraud but if it was enough to make a difference we'd know".  And for the most part that's true.  You can't say that in the states. 

Only way I can think of how to explain this is the following.

Most people are aware of the enormous quantity of information out there today as opposed to the 1985 (just as an example). With increased information in general.. they also infer that voting records and data should follow suit. With this expectation of greater volume of information and therefore access.. certain types view the lack of transparency as a conspiracy. Someone is trying to rig the game and keeping the information behind lock and key. They have greater access to certain information than they did in the past.. so why not this? Answer.. laws passed in most states during the LBJ and Nixon administrations. And because there exists no legal way to show every ballot and connect it to the voter by way of SSN, address, and such.. (confidentiality is a bit_h).. this feeds the conspiracy theories. main reason that I do not believe that it occurred in NV is the voting results from 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020. County by county.. the percentage who vote R or D are remarkably consistent. The only difference is the population of 3 counties.. 2 of which were blue counties and have seen major population growth. 

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Only way I can think of how to explain this is the following.

Most people are aware of the enormous quantity of information out there today as opposed to the 1985 (just as an example). With increased information in general.. they also infer that voting records and data should follow suit. With this expectation of greater volume of information and therefore access.. certain types view the lack of transparency as a conspiracy. Someone is trying to rig the game and keeping the information behind lock and key. They have greater access to certain information than they did in the past.. so why not this? Answer.. laws passed in most states during the LBJ and Nixon administrations. And because there exists no legal way to show every ballot and connect it to the voter by way of SSN, address, and such.. (confidentiality is a bit_h).. this feeds the conspiracy theories. main reason that I do not believe that it occurred in NV is the voting results from 2008, 2012, 2016, and 2020. County by county.. the percentage who vote R or D are remarkably consistent. The only difference is the population of 3 counties.. 2 of which were blue counties and have seen major population growth. 

It's a nice theory but we can see from the actions of other countries that is just simply not entirely accurate.

It is not difficult to create a system where the opportunity for fraud is very low and that there are safeguards in place such that if fraud was happening on any substantial level it would almost certainly be seen.

Canada does this. Many countries do this.

America does not do this. And the result is nobody trusts the system. 

In Canada Trudeau won the last two elections with less than the popular vote. In other words more people voted for someone else. But you don't hear hues  and cries that Our system has been rigged or the liberals cheated etc etc. The rare times that we do get election interference that is even on a noticeable level it gets caught and we hear about it and it gets investigated and it still didn't make a difference. People have faith in the system.

America should change whatever laws are necessary to ensure that they can say the same thing

[Hodad]

20 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

If there was no cheating, the democrats wouldn't be mad about stopping cheating.

You people are unbelievably gullible. You will fall for any random post on the internet and then treat it as something meaningful. Do better. 

Republicans control the voter rolls in Maricopa county.

 

[CdnFox]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You people are unbelievably gullible. You will fall for any random post on the internet and then treat it as something meaningful. Do better. 

Republicans control the voter rolls in Maricopa county.

 

"You people are unbelievably gullible. You will fall for any random post on the internet and then treat it as something meaningful. Here's a random post i found on the internet that i want you to treat as something meaningful! "

 

Honestly, how do you people get  your pants on in the morning. 

 

 

[Rebound]

22 hours ago, CdnFox said:

If the evidence wasn't at least compelling that they in fact did then it would be dismissed as frivolous

And maybe their suit will be dismissed. All they did was announce that they filed the lawsuit.  
 

Most tellingly: They allege that illegal immigrants and non-citizens are on these voter rolls, but they don’t say how many or what their evidence is.  Their only allegation is that DHS has the means to verify the citizenship status of every voter in a state.  This is not clear. Maybe they do and maybe they don’t, but the Supreme Court ruled that requiring voters to prove citizenship status in a federal election is unconstitutional for some reason; probably because not all voters can. 

Edited September 9 by Rebound

[herbie]

Note how the resident bot must instantly reply to everything without actually addressing the subject. only the content of or his opinion of the previous poster. Especially if it makes him look foolish like implying that no proof = proof as in this thread.