Alan Schulkin, Democrat member of NYC’s voting commission, admits that vote fraud is rampant in New York, and that some sort of ID requirement would be a great idea:
While discussing the potential for fraud, Schulkin volunteered that in some parts of the city, “they bus people around to vote . . . They put them in a bus and go poll site to poll site.”
Asked which neighborhoods, Schulkin said, “I don’t want to say.”
When the undercover mentions black and Hispanic neighborhoods, Schulkin responded, “Yeah . . . and Chinese, too.”
At another point in the conversation, he discussed potential absentee ballot fraud.
“Oh, there’s thousands of absentee ballots . . . I don’t know where they came from,” he said.
He later claimed that he made his responses to placate the reporter. Which makes sense, because it’s highly doubtful he’s used to reporters asking him actual questions.
Also; he doesn’t want to wind up a “suicide” in the East River with four shots in the back of his head.
He admitted he has direct knowledge of a federal offense. Why isn’t this man being interviewed by the DOJ and FBI right now? Why do we allow, yes we allow, these reprobates to subvert our democracy?
When the shit hits the fan, and I firmly believe that it’s coming, remember we didn’t have to go through all that horror. We could have avoided the confrontation completely if we simply got off our asses and held these criminals responsible and applied the tools we had at our disposal to dispose of them.
The authorities are complicit in this crime, there will be no investigation, but why doesn’t Veritas dispatch crews to monitor the coming and going of buses at polling sites. All they need is one instance, just one, of people casting ballots at multiple venues and we would have the evidence necessary to really start rooting these scumbags out everywhere.
This is one of the reasons the Democrats want “early voting” so bad. Its a lot easier to bus people to pulling places when you have 45 days to do it. And you can bus them to a different polling location next week.
Chuck is exactly right. How many of those early voters will show up again on election day? Hell, no one will know.
This is James Deceptive Edit O’Keefe.
It is highly unlikely that anyone made this statement as presented. And O’Keefe is notorious for deceptive and dishonest crap like this.
Isn’t it amazing that no CREDIBLE news source is taking this seriously? Because it is total right wing fantasy rubbish is why.
In this age, for quite some time now, multiple election cycles, NO ONE has ever taken a picture with their phone cameras of any such events as buses filled with illegal voters showing up at polls.
And apparently none of you recall that when you show up, you have to be on the voter rolls in order to vote. Same day registration everywhere it exists requires multiple sources of ID, including at least one photo ID.
You do not ‘just show up’, much less do so en masse.
I don’t know yet what the real story is behind this crap, but you have to be stupid enough to buy the Brooklyn Bridge from a stranger to give this any credence.
HINT Deplorable Swiftee and Chuck – early voters are so noted in the production of voting rolls. So HELL YES, EVERYONE WILL KNOW.
This kind of crap is suitable only for the low information right wing nut predisposed to be lied to; anyone who knows how government works – for example how long marriage licenses are valid for before expiring, in the case of the FALSE Ilhan Omar story – knows how voting works.
Looking forward to the election this year, as an assistant head election judge.
More of you should try it; it would put crap like this out of your heads for good to have some practical experience with the process.
This is actually rather refreshing. The usual Democrat narrative regarding voter ID was “we never looked for anything, never found anything, and that means there’s no problem and we shouldn’t look for anything.” This upends that narrative.
Now whether it gets traction or not, who knows, but it’s a start.
My take? The left has very big plans for government. They crave the power to do things to us. Many of them will do anything to get this power and control to achieve their goals.
Eventually things will come out. Almost everyone has a smart phone. Something will eventually get exposed if fraud is happening on a regular basis.
This guy deserves a medal; the first Democrat caught on camera telling the truth. Of course the Democrat party will probably burn his house down now.
Eventually things will come out.
This is out right now, but nothing will come of it because we are all to busy working jobs to fight back.
DG,
You never, ever, ever learn.
This is James Deceptive Edit O’Keefe.
Appeal to authority/ad hominem.
Care to refute his actual contention?
Let’s see:
It is highly unlikely that anyone made this statement as presented.
Ah! Well, if you say so, that’s good enough for me!
And O’Keefe is notorious for deceptive and dishonest crap like this.
That’s all you got?
You’re notorious for never, ever getting facts straight, having terrible reading comprehension, and not knowing the difference between a “fact” and a “case”. Should we just ignore everything you say?
(More than most people already do, I mean?)
Isn’t it amazing that no CREDIBLE news source is taking this seriously?
By “CREDIBLE”, you mean “mainstream media?”
The ones that are patently obviously massaging the news to support Hillary?
More on that tomorrow.
Because it is total right wing fantasy rubbish is why.
DG, let me spell out a truth we’ve all divined after these last six or seven years: If DG writes it, it’s probably comically wrong.
And apparently none of you recall that when you show up, you have to be on the voter rolls in order to vote. Same day registration everywhere it exists requires multiple sources of ID, including at least one photo ID.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!
In Minnesota, among others, you can be vouched in to register, without any photo ID whatsoever.
Do you ever know what you’re talking about?
You do not ‘just show up’, much less do so en masse.
Again – so says you. Someone with a very hard-heard reputation for always being wrong about the simplest facts, but covering it with copious arrogance.
I don’t know yet what the real story is behind this crap…
But you’re going to act like you know it anyway, and condescend like you really are an authority?
Like…
This kind of crap is suitable only for the low information right wing nut bla bla bla
…there?
in the case of the FALSE Ilhan Omar story
Again – using your assumptions in place of facts. As usual.
Looking forward to the election this year, as an assistant head election judge.
Oh, good lord.
DG, exactly how is it possible that this was edited? And for reference, Project Veritas releases the full films of everything it does. You’re doing a nice job parroting the lies of liberal activist groups, but there are facts out there that tend not to budge for their convenience.
When did Dog Gone become a virulent racist?
“Same day registration everywhere it exists requires multiple sources of ID, including at least one photo ID.”
Oh, that’s when it happened. Dog Gone From The Past told me so.
“This kind of crap is suitable only for the low information right wing nut predisposed to be lied to; anyone who knows how government works – for example how long marriage licenses are valid for before expiring, in the case of the FALSE Ilhan Omar story – knows how voting works.”
I recognize that the words are English, but put together in that order, well, “It’s Greek to me.” (Apparently the Apocalypse has been averted and all is right with the world. See my comment from “Don’t Hate Them Because They’re Beautiful.” http://www.shotinthedark.info/wp/?p=60561#comments )
The definition of voter fraud (not electoral fraud, which is something else) used by the Left is taken from a paper produced by the far-left Brennan Center for Justice. The Brennan Center is open borders.
The Brennan Center clipped it from a political science paper. The poli-sci paper was a study of voter fraud in one state (Maryland, IIRC). The political science prof’s study was non-partisan and rather technical. She was describing different forms of stealing elections, not trying to deny that stealing elections ever happened, or that there was no such thing as voter fraud.
The Brennan Center convinced Left wing civil rights attorneys at the federal JD to use its definition. Using this definition, voter fraud is extremely difficult to prove, because it involves proving intent and, rather than their actions. The perpetrator must be shown to not only have knowingly voted illegally, but to have done so in an attempt to alter the results of an election. If you knowingly vote in the wrong precinct, you have not committed provable voter fraud.
Liberals like to have it both ways, because they believe that politics is reality. A political definition of voter fraud, taken from a political science paper, is adopted as a legal principle w/o ever being voted on. When you question that principle, you are told that it is “the law”, when what it really is, is politics.
Conservatives are more honest. They tend to describe the process of who we allow and who we forbid to vote in political terms. Some people should be encouraged to vote. Some people should not be encouraged to vote. The goal is the health of the Republic.
Liberals tend to use the language of legal rights when describing who is allowed to vote. These rights are divorced from any concept of what is good or bad for the Republic.
One of the great contradictions in liberalism (and there are many), is that in the perfect liberal world, every person would be required to vote, but the vote would be meaningless. For example, you would be required to vote on whether your mandatory recycling bins should be blue or green, but you would not be allowed to vote on whether or not recycling should be mandatory.
DG; FOS