About that non-existant voter fraud.

Project Veritas strikes again

Not very different from the scheme I reported here from 2008 in Raceland LA where workers in a nursing home colluded with community organizers to vote ballots for scores of dementia patients.

This is standard Democrat party strategy across the country.

39 thoughts on “About that non-existant voter fraud.

    1. That’s still about twice the margin for Warner over Gillespe here in VA. 4 times Trump’s margin over Hillary.

      In close elections, it matters.

      And, of course. 1 fraudulent vote is too many, because it cancels out mine.


      1. The only problem with a scheme to vote demented persons is that rarely are they registered at the facility. Their home addresses are where their attorney in fact resides. Had to explain to Texas that, “no Mom resides in Bexar county,” and similar to Virginia’s Dept of Taxation, “yes, her address on her federal taxes is in Virginia, but she lives in a lockdown in Texas.”

        Her absentee ballot, if one were requested, would have been sent to me here, and somehow I can’t imagine the staff driving a bus load of the patients all over town to their AoF polling places.

        Liked by 1 person

  1. “This is standard Democrat party strategy across the country.”

    Really? Any evidence? Categorical statements like this are almost always “alternative facts.” We DO know that Republican operatives in NC pulled a stunt like this. So, with equal justification, this must be standard GOP strategy across the country. Right?


    Liked by 1 person

    1. That’s evidence of fraud of this type in MN, and personal knowledge of the same 1000 miles away. so I’d say there is enough smoke that the FBI should be searching out the fires.

      If O’Keefe and sting them, the FBI can too.


      1. Neither you nor O’Keefe have any credibility on any of this. O’Keefe has proven his intellectual dishonesty over and over again and would be in jail for his criminal behavior if he were not white. You, of course, are a government and democracy hating partisan. So what you describe as “personal knowledge” is knowledge seen through that prism. Which is maybe why you cannot see and acknowledge the evidence from NC that this is not uniquely something that Democrats do.

        By the way, people can, do and should help shut-ins participate in the election process. The fact that MAYBE a few isolated criminals try to exploit the process does not make the effort suspect.

        As for the FBI, the government has been in the hands of people who would like nothing better than to document widespread voting fraud. They have been working at it for years now and still have very little to show for it because – in spite of the story-line being pushed by the wannabe autocrat in the White House – there is no there there. Not on a scale that matters.

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Ad hominem. Uh, no. I explained clearly and reasonably why the “evidence” offered is suspect. O’Keefe’s sorry record speaks for itself. And Tabor will not deny the way I characterized the prism through which he sees most issues. He IS very partisan. He DOES hate the government. And he applauds every effort to reduce the number of people who vote. Those facts DO reduce his credibility especially while he is peddling the false and divisive narrative emanating from the Trump propaganda machine.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. Keep in mind that it was my wife’s grandmother, who was in a nursing home but NOT senile whose vote was stolen.

            We discovered it when my Sister in law took her to the polls to vote and found that her address had been changed on the rolls and that she had already voted absentee.

            She was able to recover the fraudulent vote and vote in person, but there were well over 100 old ladies in that home who did not go to the polls.

            But your defense of stealing elections is duly noted.


          3. “But your defense of stealing elections is duly noted.”

            I still haven’t seen condemnation of the NC-9 debacle from you. THTA was truly stealing an election.


          4. RE: “Ad hominem. Uh, no. I explained clearly and reasonably why the “evidence” offered is suspect.”

            Wrong. You must abide by the rules, or be subject to them.


          5. “Wrong. You must abide by the rules, or be subject to them.”

            Then I will remind you that nivlac and Bobrsmith violate the rules with every post. Your singing out of Mr. Murphy is quite telling.

            Liked by 1 person

          6. “Your ad hominem arguments are both fallacious and a violation of Forum standards. ”

            Yerp. Gonna say it again. You are singling out Mr. Murphy simply because he DISAGREES with you on , well, everything. Yet those who AGTREE with you are given pass?


          7. RE: “Then I will remind you that nivlac and Bobrsmith violate the rules with every post.”

            I don’t find that to be true, but I also don’t comment on every instance.


          8. I really try to avoid being heavy handed with anyone. No one has been censored, though some warnings have been issued, privately when possible.

            I would rather call someone on ad hominem fallacies than block them for it, and let the community take it for what it is worth.


          9. “I don’t find that to be true”….

            Then I say you are not paying attention. I also say it AGAIN: They get a pass because they agree with your view point.

            And you have NEVER commented on an instance by Mssrs. Smith and nivlac. If you are going to hold Mr. Murphy to one standard and those that agree with you to antoher, perhaps you should relinquish the position of trust Dr. Tabor has granted you.


          10. Mr. Roberts, your admonition might be something that I would consider taking seriously if you had ever even once offered similar advice to those who frequently indulge in every form of salacious name-calling addressed at me and a few others. You have not. I do not believe it to be coincidental that those persons general follow the same party line that you follow.

            I stand by my remarks about the credibility of the “evidence” offered.

            Try this thought experiment . . . If I were to claim that “Criminal behavior is standard Republican party strategy across the country.” And as evidence cited a Daily Kos article and my having personally observed something bad decades ago. You would be among the first to note that the evidence offered was not credible with regard to such a sweeping generalization. Because it isn’t. And neither was the evidence offered by Tabor to support his sweeping accusation and to justify the use of the apparatus of the state to harass the opposition party.

            Liked by 1 person

          11. I do not doubt the story that you now provide the details of, but those details make it even more clear that your sweeping accusation that . . .”This is standard Democrat party strategy across the country” is not supported by evidence worthy of the name.

            Just for starters, your home state of Louisiana is notoriously corrupt and has been for generations. Secondly, you cannot know who is responsible for the skullduggery of how that vote was cast. From court records we know that Republicans are not above such criminal behavior.

            Finally, a tiny cherry-picked piece of anecdotal evidence is not probative of anything. You know that as well as I do. How many activists from both parties seek out voters that are shut-in and work in good faith to help them participate? There is zero evidence that the behavior you describe is “standard” or “typical.”

            Liked by 1 person

          12. “I don’t find that to be true, but I also don’t comment on every instance.”

            I find that impossible to believe. Smith and NIVLAC have commented on many threads you are in. NIVLC told Paul he was a sick individual and Smith does nothing but troll and insult the liberals.

            I admonished NIVLAC. His was a cheap, schoolyard insult. As are Smith’s.

            You are taking issue with disagreements as being ad hominem.

            Now I did rush to judgement when you call me dishonest, but that is just me. I am mistaken, misbegotten, misaligned, in error or partisan. But not dishonest. I should have ignored that, but you caught me at a bad time.

            I have noticed that the posts are more civil overall now than in the past. Perhaps a bit more argumentative, but less insulting. I think that is a good thing.

            Liked by 2 people

          13. RE: ” If you are going to hold Mr. Murphy to one standard and those that agree with you to antoher, perhaps you should relinquish the position of trust Dr. Tabor has granted you.”

            Would you like me to censor you for accusing others of hypocrisy as you often do? That happens to be a violation of the rule against personal attacks.

            You should be happy that I comment in public rather than act in private. I think my approach to these kinds of issues is at least honest and fair.


          14. RE: “I have noticed that the posts are more civil overall now than in the past.”

            I had the same impression for awhile, but think the beneficial trend had started to reverse lately. For what it’s worth, my impression is that expressions of Trump hatred are bleeding into other behavior.


          1. You are working overtime to embarrass yourself today. American Greatness? Really? Is that a known Russian disinformation site?

            So the story is that there are allegations made by private “investigators” of a massive vote harvesting scheme. I have just spent some time with Google and cannot find a single reputable organization reporting on this “story” nor any evidence that charges have been filed, indictments rendered or a trial held. Given that these two “investigators” claim to have evidence of as many as 750,000 ballots being illegally processed does it not strike you as odd that the legal authorities are not expected to do anything about it until after the election? According to your link.

            Let me add, Texas does not mail ballots to all registered voters and it is one of the few states that will not accept fear of Covid-19 as a reason to vote absentee. It will require – as right wing nonsense always does – a massive conspiracy involving hundreds of people to pull this off the logistical challenges involved and to keep it a secret.

            No evidence worthy of the name and a story that defies common sense. What list do you want to add it to – the list of laughable Trump campaign claims? It is already a pretty long list.

            I will give you this . . . a Google search yields page after page after page of right wing kook and Russian disinformation sites that are pushing this same story. But hey, I thought Google was hard at work suppressing the “truth” that might help Trump sell his bull???


          2. Actually, I did not go straight to trashing this silly site. I first did you the courtesy of reading the story and trying to find any credible organization that was offering objective reporting on this topic. The more I found out about this “scandal” the more ridiculous it proved to be. In the end, I came to feel a bit of resentment that a supposedly sincere poster interested in discussing the truth would subject us to such trash and that was reflected in my first comment.

            If you have any actual evidence that this is not total bullshit I am quite ready to look at it. As I said, I could not find ANY.


          3. Your first link – the one I ridiculed – starts with the following statement . . .

            “A Biden Campaign operative in Texas is attempting to rig the 2020 election with the help of others in a massive ballot harvesting scheme, according to two private investigators who testified under oath that they have “video evidence, documentation and witnesses” to prove it.”

            Rising to the challenge you have now provided a bit of credible evidence from The Texan which I assume is a reputable newspaper. From your new link we learn that all of this dates back to 2019 and does not actually relate to the 2020 election AT ALL. Your new link also includes this statement . . .

            “Witnesses also told the investigator that two employees in the Harris County Clerk’s office are facilitating the operation and working to mix the forged ballots in with legally submitted ballots.”

            It is also reported in your link that an election official who knew of this activity abruptly resigned in May. More evidence that old news has been gussied up to mislead the willing to be mislead.

            So, the first link deserved the ridicule I gave it. It is grossly dishonest in its “reporting.” Based on this new link, there MAY well be a case of election fraud going on here but as with almost every serious election fraud it requires corruption by election officials. If it was not absentee ballot, election officials who are corrupt can screw with vote in any number of ways.

            Bottom line, it looks to me that my pushing back on that American Greatness bull helped keep you from being bamboozled again. You are welcome.


          4. The fact that the practice extends over years shows it to be routine Democratic Party procedure, and it uses the same technique that has shown up in previous examples.

            That at the least proves the claim that mail-in vote fraud is rare to non-existent is false.


          5. Are you going to apologize for linking to a garbage site and sharing more “alternative facts” as if they were the truth? I will not hold my breath.

            This case in Texas has not been adjudicated. We have seen “evidence” from Republican operatives. There may or may not be a case to be made in court. And, in any case, it does not proves your initial claim that this criminal behavior is standard practice for Democrats. There is just as much, if not more, evidence that it is standard practice for Republicans. We both have about the same amount of evidence to go on if this Texas case holds up. You make silly blanket accusations. I don’t. Len doesn’t. Adam doesn’t. But you want serious discussions here?

            As for the claim that this case “at the least proves the claim that mail-in vote fraud is rare to non-existent is false” hinges on what the word “rare” means. You need a lot more than one or two proven cases to get from rare to something that might swing a Presidential election.


          6. You can only catch those who fail.

            That it has shown up in different parts of the country over a period of at least a decade is more than enough proof that it is standard practice and in close races enough to make a difference.

            Warner’s victory over Gillespe, for example, was well within the range for this kind of fraud to have turned the election.


          7. Uh, with all due respect, things that you can imagine are not evidence of anything.

            I can imagine Republican election officials disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of people by deliberate over zealous purging of election rolls. And throwing swing states to Trump. Oh, wait – unlike you – I do not have to imagine that.

            Your sweeping generalizations based on tidbits shows only how small a role actual evidence plays in your forming your accusations. You do have a vivid imagination. I will give you that.


      2. “We discovered it when my Sister in law took her to the polls to vote and found that her address had been changed on the rolls and that she had already voted absentee.”

        Who changed her address?

        It takes insiders to fake voters at the polls. No amount of checking and cross checking can catch the few who vote illegally by virtue of insider connections to the registrar or at the actual polls.

        Liked by 2 people

  2. “Voter fraud!” Project Veritas?  Seriously?  — Amateurs!  
    Here’s how you fabricate an election emergency:


    Suckers and losers fall for it every time. Then again, some Americans aren’t as smart as NAZIS so, “voter fraud” will work for them.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. The creator of Godwin’s Law explains why some Nazi comparisons don’t break his famous internet rule.


        Translation: It’s okay to call a Nazi a Nazi. e.g. When they go beyond the internet and are doing Nazi things in person, it’s okay, even necessary, to call a Nazi a Nazi.

        Do you support it? Then, own it! Fly your swastikas high Proud Boy!

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Godwin’s Law used to apply, but in the last year or so it is obvious fallacious in the case of the current regime.

        Condemn American elections as always fraudulent. Check
        Slow down USPS knowing full well we need to beef it up for a fair election result. Check
        Send federal troops to quell protests. Check
        Encouraged mobs to call for imprisonment of political opponents. Check
        Encourage violence against Americans by his supporters at rallies. Check
        Praise armed gangs for their support in the streets. Check
        Blame the Jews for our troubles. Check (Soros, et.al and international financiers in case you were wondering along with that “Sheriff’s” 6 pointed star in his ads.)
        Blaming immigrants, Jewish or not, for our troubles. Check
        Threatening violence if Trump doesn’t win. Check
        Extorting American companies who don’t praise him or does at he demands. Check
        Encourage people not to wear masks and praise those who rush statehouses. #LIBERATE Check
        Insult military staff, generals, POW’s and those who died for us. Check
        Refuse oversight by IG’s or Congress. Check
        Lying to all Americans about the pandemic. Check

        In my opinion Godwin’s Law has expired courtesy of the present regime.

        Here is the thing, however. None of these acts and attacks will make any difference to the hard core base.
        That is to be expected, I suppose.

        But the good news is that it makes the base a bit smaller and turns off many of the voters he need to win who are sitting on the fence. Even some who voted for him in 2016. Plus his actions have put more than a few GOP Senators in the ducking tank at the carnival and help get a Democratic majority.


        Liked by 2 people

    1. Trump’s whole strategy for staying in power is a very close analog to how Hitler used the Reichstag fire. Sow chaos, incite violence and claim imagined evil doing by the opposition as an excuse to ignore the Constitution and the votes of the people.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. “…to ignore the Constitution and the votes of the people.”

        On the money.

        He is actively and with malice aforethought trying to bypass the American voters by either having states pick the president because there are more Republican run statehouses or getting SCOTUS to do what his record can’t by stuffing the bench.

        Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s