• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Three states refuse to give voter roll data to President's commission on election integrity

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yesterday, we learned that President Trump’s commission on election integrity fired off a letter to all 50 state governments. In it was a request for voter roll data including "including their names, birthdays, the last four digits of their Social Security numbers and their voting history dating back to 2006." So far, three states - California, Virginia, and Kentucky - have signaled that they will not honor the request.

In California's case, the reason given is: "participation would only serve to legitimize the false and already debunked claims of massive voter fraud made by the President."

Hmmmmm... From THE HILL

State officials from Virginia, California and Kentucky said Thursday that they will refuse a request for voter roll data from President Trump's commission on election integrity.

Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) said in a statement that he has “no intention” of fulfilling the request, defending the fairness of his state's elections. He also blasted the commission in his statement, saying it was based on the "false notion" of widespread voter fraud in the November presidential election.

“At best this commission was set up as a pretext to validate Donald Trump’s alternative election facts, and at worst is a tool to commit large-scale voter suppression,” McAuliffe stated.

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla (D) also responded to the request, saying “I will not provide sensitive voter information to a commission that has already inaccurately passed judgment that millions of Californians voted illegally” in the last election.

“California’s participation would only serve to legitimize the false and already debunked claims of massive voter fraud made by the President, Vice President, and [Kansas Secretary of State Kris] Kobach,” Padilla stated.

So, the obvious question I'd ask is: "Why do you think it would legitimize 'false claims' if the data would prove no such fraud took place?"

Three states refuse to give voter roll data to President's commission on election integrity
 

Zenas

Active Member
Not having Kentucky data won't make a whole lot of difference because of its relatively small size. Besides most of the illegals in this state are migrant farm workers or drug dealers, neither of whom tend to vote. California is a different matter and, if the information is ever made available, it is likely that 2 of 3 million non citizens are on the rolls.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The demand was framed in the wrong way...

If they had said "The election voting integrate and a possible Russian collusion with high officials ... blah, blah, blah..." then there would have been immediate success.

Then the 2.5 million fraudulent votes could have been blamed on the Putin/Trump collusion.

All opinionated of course.

HankD
 

777

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yeah, what all three of these people are saying is that the concept of voting fraud is so outrageous, they don't have to prove it. But this is a negative (no voter fraud) that they could prove but they won't. Can't see any reason for that except . . .
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But hey Trump's tax returns are certainly in need to be revealed. There is no doubt they are hiding something.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
But hey Trump's tax returns are certainly in need to be revealed. There is no doubt they are hiding something.
Trump doesn't want the FBI to investigate his campaign's possible ties to Russia hackers. What does he have to hide?

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Although I believe voter fraud exists, but has not, in my opinion, resulted in an electoral upset, I agree with the states that said "no" - if not with the reasons they gave.

All elections are at the state level or below. There are NO national elections.

Therefore, any voter fraud should be investigated at the state level. Keep the federal government's hands off our elections.
 

777

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
... voter information including names, the last four digits of social security numbers, addresses, birth dates, political affiliation, felony convictions and voting histories...

rather intrusive, IMO, especially the SS thing. Maybe Trump should simply buy it from California, all this is for sale if the price is right:

Voter Data Available for Purchase

and I know they serve jury summons using these lists.Federal grand juries could subpoena the data as well.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Trump himself has said so, in tweets he's made. Also testimony by James Comey under oath.
If so, Then it is because they believe Comey's evil influence has corrupted the FBI.

The FBI which if you remember targeted for "offenses" those who had upon them the wrath of Obama, mostly conservative groups, those FBI leaders guilty of this crime were not brought to justice under the Obama administration but that justice is now in the works. They will be exposed.

Trump doesn't trust the FBI.

HankD
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Trump himself has said so, in tweets he's made. Also testimony by James Comey under oath.
Trump never said any such thing. He said there were no ties to investigate. And Comey said the same thing. Under oath.

This is just more Trump Derangement Syndrome. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Trump never said any such thing. He said there were no ties to investigate. And Comey said the same thing. Under oath.

This is just more Trump Derangement Syndrome. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Trump never said to James Comey, "'I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go." ??

Speaking of Trump syndromes, people need to stop thinking that because there are no direct investigations into Trump himself that there are no investigations into his associates and his campaign staff. Which is what I said if you care to re-read my post.
 

Rob_BW

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Therefore, any voter fraud should be investigated at the state level. Keep the federal government's hands off our elections.
What if rampant evidence of voter fraud existed, but a state refused to investigate or stop it? (Hypothetical question, I'm not saying that this is happening.)
 

Bro. Curtis

<img src =/curtis.gif>
Site Supporter
Trump doesn't want the FBI to investigate his campaign's possible ties to Russia hackers. What does he have to hide?

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.
Snork. There may be a few dems as well. Obama being one. This Russian thing was overplayed. People just don't care about it anymore, if it happened it didn't effect the election, if it happened team zero didn't even try to stop it and if it happened, Trump wasn't involved. Time to move on.
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
What if rampant evidence of voter fraud existed, but a state refused to investigate or stop it? (Hypothetical question, I'm not saying that this is happening.)
As a sovereign state they can do as they please.
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Snork. There may be a few dems as well. Obama being one. This Russian thing was overplayed. People just don't care about it anymore, if it happened it didn't effect the election, if it happened team zero didn't even try to stop it and if it happened, Trump wasn't involved. Time to move on.
I am ready to move on. I don't think Trump had anything to do with the Russians, but his associates, I'm not so sure.

My post was more a response to, "why are the states not opening up to the investigation of voter fraud? What have they got to hide?"



Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.
 

Rob_BW

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
As a sovereign state they can do as they please.
Then should the rest of the nation be forced to accept a tainted count, or do they have the right to discount that states electoral votes or reject their representatives?
 

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus
Administrator
Then should the rest of the nation be forced to accept a tainted count, or do they have the right to discount that states electoral votes or reject their representatives?
What do the other states have to do with who is elected by a sovereign state?
 

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
What do the other states have to do with who is elected by a sovereign state?
Remember the election of 2000? Florida? If some state had questionable results I'd bet there would be a lawsuit that would get to the Supreme Court.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo.
 
Top