There are instances of illegals voting and dead people voting. How pervasive is it? We don't know, because the government simply doesn't investigate it post-election. Even when Trump wanted to investigate it, the states circled the wagons and did everything they can to prevent a comprehensive investigation.
> The very next instruction could have been Ok, I'll need to see proof of citizenship.
LOL. It could have been that, but chances are very good it wouldn't have been that, seeing as I've NEVER seen that asked of anyone that registered to vote in the line when I was at the DMV nor was I asked that when I registered.
>How do you get to the DMV if you live 30 miles away from the closest one, and have to work two jobs just to put food on the table?
You fucking take a day off and go to get your ID, just like 99.99% of the population does.
>And if you don't have a birth certificate or SS card, what then? A trip to the social security office with two witnesses, if both you and them have the time and the resources?
Then in all likelihood, you are an illegal alien and shouldn't have the right to vote in a Federal election or most state elections (California excepting).
>This is discriminatory, and is intendedt to be so. It's not about what's fair, it's about getting more votes for your candidate by any legal means.
Yep, it's discriminatory against illegal aliens and the very small fraction of the population who both do not have a photo ID and getting one would represent some sort of undue burden on them.
The left opposes voter ID laws simply because they depend on ineligible voters to be competitive in national elections. It's that simple. It's why they challenge in court and in the media any attempt to cleaning up voter rolls or any other measure that would limit their ability to bus illegal voters in to swing elections.
>Maybe on the state level, but nationally, on the TV, we kept it classy.
That's because the media - since the JFK days - has worked to cover up for Democrats. JFK wasn't "classy". None of the Kennedy clan was classy.
>He was the last president we could ever be actually proud of
What, exactly, did Kennedy do that was so praiseworthy? Aside from being photogenic and a serial pussy-hound, what did he do?
I mean, there is pretty good evidence that suggests that election fraud in Illinois committed by the Daly Machine and the Mafia is what got him elected.
Tomorrow? That's already yesterday. The UK WILL prosecute you for hate speech for doing things like...quoting passages of the Koran to demonstrate that Islam isn't exactly founded on an ideology of peace.
He was also a fan of censoring all other viewpoints. And it worked. It should be noted that Hitler came to power not because he was elected - because he lost the election for President in 1932, but because he was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg (who won the election).
Antisemitism in Germany was less prevalent in 1932 than in France or Poland at the same time. It really kicked off into high gear when Hitler replaced Hindenburg after his death and used the powers of the state to seize control of the media, assumed dictatorial powers, and started indoctrinating Germany day and night.
TL/DL: censorship is a tool of tyranny, not a safeguard against it.
>Sure it's censorship. That's the whole point of it. The big difference between many European countries and the US is that they are more open about doing censorship when deemed beneficial for society as a whole. WWII happened on their own soil, and they want to take steps to prevent it from happening again.
>But what do the leftist billionaries get for their money? How does tightening & enforcing financial regs help Soros?
They get power.
>How does paying MORE taxes help the Steyer et al?
Billionaires don't really pay taxes. Especially not inheritance taxes. The start foundations like George Soros (or Bill Gates) and donate the bulk of their fortunes to the foundation and then have their children sit on the foundation still controlling the funds.
Billionaires own the means of production, so even when taxes do hit them, they just pass the taxes on to consumers as part of the cost of doing business.
>Fox News, even with Ailes gone, is still just a propaganda & apologist arm of the GOP.
So tell me what you think about CNN, MSNBC, ABC News, CBS News, NPR, NBC News, VICE News, WaPo, the NYT, etc?
>And there's no shortage of rightwing media. Conservative talk radio is an empire unto itself and there must be close to TWENTY high status former elected officials that have their own regular radio programs.
That's funny...and a bit hypocritical. Let's look at just a few of the politically connected left in the media:
(CNN) Chris Cuomo...brother to Andrew Cuomo (current left-wing governor of New York)
(ABC News) George Stephanopolous...former Clinton cabinet member
(CNN) Ben Rhodes...former National Security Advisor to Obama
(ABC News) Ian Cameron - wife of Susan Rice of the "unmasking" fame in the Obama administration
(MSNBC) Chris Matthews - former speechwriter for Jimmy Carter and Chief of Staff for Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill
(CNN) Donna Brazil - Chair of the Democratic National Committee
(NPR WH correpondant) Ari Shapiro - married to Michael Gottlieb, a lawyer for the Obama legal team
(WaPo) Shailagh Murrah - communications director for Joe Biden as VP
(WSJ) Neil King - married to Shailagh Murrah
(NBC Today Show) Savannah Guthrie - co-host, married to Michael Feldman - chief of staff for Al Gore
(ABC/Univision) Matthew Jaffe - married to Katie Hogan, Obama's former deputy press secretary
Literally, the tip of the iceberg. There's a reason why a lot of the news headlines about Republicans read like they were written by the DNC and pushed out by all of the media outlets by friendly reporters - because they probably were - like White House correspondant Glenn Thrush's coordination with Podesta on a Hillary piece.
>The Koch brothers are ridiculously wealthy and were budgeting close to $900 million dollars in the last election and have been very active politically for decades.
>It's rumored they may spend $400 million in next year's mid-terms.
>Sheldon Adelson spent over $90 million trying to support Romney in 2012 and donated $25 million to Trump's SuperPAC.
It's chicken feed compared to what Soros is spending and just donated: http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/1.... And Soros is hardly the only left-wing billionaire. There is also Pierre Omidyar and Tom Steyer, not to mention the Ford Foundation which has been underwriting radical left-wing causes for the last 40 years or so with it's $11 billion endowment.
>I don't believe though that DNA should ever be used to convict someone.
I think we are saying the same thing more or less, in different ways. DNA evidence should be used as a diagnostic funnel. But 95% certainty is usually sufficient in court to secure a conviction by a jury or a judge - whether or not you or I agree with those odds.
>Is he or is he not a true example of rightwing hate? Simple question.
Probably. But the point stands most of the "examples" of right wing hate have been hoaxes perpetrated by the "victims".
>I have yet to see evidence that the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" rally was a "white nationalist" event at all; it seems some white nationalists chose independently to attend it and that's all it took.
I think the Charlottesville UTR was an astroturf event by the left. The organizer, Jason Kessler, had previously been active in Occupy Wall Street. But suddenly, after the election of Donald Trump went from being a strident leftist protesting our evil capitalist system to a white nationalist? Call me skeptical.
Additionally, there were plenty of eye witness accounts of "protestors" from both sides getting bussed in - in the same or adjoining busses and getting off at the same time.
The rally itself was permitted, but when the bulk of the UTR folks went to the rally point, the police at that point declared it unlawful and channeled the protestors (by buffeting them with riot shields) into the counter protestors where they were then assaulted with rocks, bottles, sticks, pepper spray, etc.
So basically, there was a widespread implicit (and probably explicit) coordination between the authorities, the UTR organizers, and the left to create an incident that would reflect poorly on the right. Does it mean that there weren't real white nationalists and racists present and involved? Of course not, but the entire thing stank of a setup. I think the local and state authorities along with the left (but I repeat myself) got exactly what they wanted where previously the evidence was overwhelmingly in the direction that it was the left carrying out violent attacks just prior (e.g., Berkeley).
>Nah, it's just the right wing constantly screaming about false flag operations, then getting caught staging them
Funny, almost all of the supposed recent racist attacks have been false flags set up by the supposed victims. For example, Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria excoriated the Air Force Academy class because of some racist graffiti that was written by...the person that "found it"...a black male.
>The people who are obsessing over gender and a thousand separate pronouns? They're actually on the fringes of the left, and the rest of the left are kinda embarrassed by them.
Funny how that embarrassment doesn't seem to translate into any sort of action of slowing down the million different gender identity juggernaut. It's ridiculous in the extreme that pretty soon all "women's" athletic world records are going to be held by XY transgender "women". This is a direct output of actions by the left. Not the fringe folks you are embarrassed by, because fringes don't get comprehensive legislation and rules changes pushed through.
If the false positive rate is 5%, it is still a useful investigative and prosecutorial tool, even though in any moderately sized city you are going to get a LOT of false positives on DNA alone.
For example, if you can place the suspect in the vicinity of the crime and a motive for the crime along with DNA evidence that says >=95%, then that's a solid conviction.
However, if you are trawling 23andme.com or Ancestry.com databases for matches, and then just grabbing and prosecuting the first match, you've got some issues with your methodology.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.washingtonexaminer....
There are instances of illegals voting and dead people voting. How pervasive is it? We don't know, because the government simply doesn't investigate it post-election. Even when Trump wanted to investigate it, the states circled the wagons and did everything they can to prevent a comprehensive investigation.
> The very next instruction could have been Ok, I'll need to see proof of citizenship.
LOL. It could have been that, but chances are very good it wouldn't have been that, seeing as I've NEVER seen that asked of anyone that registered to vote in the line when I was at the DMV nor was I asked that when I registered.
>You have to be a citizen before you can register to vote.
Legally, yes. That doesn't stop illegal aliens from registering and voting. It doesn't stop barred felons from registering and voting.
>How do you get to the DMV if you live 30 miles away from the closest one, and have to work two jobs just to put food on the table?
You fucking take a day off and go to get your ID, just like 99.99% of the population does.
>And if you don't have a birth certificate or SS card, what then? A trip to the social security office with two witnesses, if both you and them have the time and the resources?
Then in all likelihood, you are an illegal alien and shouldn't have the right to vote in a Federal election or most state elections (California excepting).
>This is discriminatory, and is intendedt to be so. It's not about what's fair, it's about getting more votes for your candidate by any legal means.
Yep, it's discriminatory against illegal aliens and the very small fraction of the population who both do not have a photo ID and getting one would represent some sort of undue burden on them.
The left opposes voter ID laws simply because they depend on ineligible voters to be competitive in national elections. It's that simple. It's why they challenge in court and in the media any attempt to cleaning up voter rolls or any other measure that would limit their ability to bus illegal voters in to swing elections.
Don't forget the OP is probably an advocate of the $15/hr minimum wage. So in fact, you could NOT hire that many employees.
>Maybe on the state level, but nationally, on the TV, we kept it classy. That's because the media - since the JFK days - has worked to cover up for Democrats. JFK wasn't "classy". None of the Kennedy clan was classy.
>He was the last president we could ever be actually proud of
What, exactly, did Kennedy do that was so praiseworthy? Aside from being photogenic and a serial pussy-hound, what did he do?
I mean, there is pretty good evidence that suggests that election fraud in Illinois committed by the Daly Machine and the Mafia is what got him elected.
>tomorrow it's someone who criticizes Islam
Tomorrow? That's already yesterday. The UK WILL prosecute you for hate speech for doing things like...quoting passages of the Koran to demonstrate that Islam isn't exactly founded on an ideology of peace.
>He was a big fan of hate speech. And it worked.
He was also a fan of censoring all other viewpoints. And it worked. It should be noted that Hitler came to power not because he was elected - because he lost the election for President in 1932, but because he was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg (who won the election).
Antisemitism in Germany was less prevalent in 1932 than in France or Poland at the same time. It really kicked off into high gear when Hitler replaced Hindenburg after his death and used the powers of the state to seize control of the media, assumed dictatorial powers, and started indoctrinating Germany day and night.
TL/DL: censorship is a tool of tyranny, not a safeguard against it.
>Sure it's censorship. That's the whole point of it. The big difference between many European countries and the US is that they are more open about doing censorship when deemed beneficial for society as a whole. WWII happened on their own soil, and they want to take steps to prevent it from happening again.
TIL that WW2 was caused by a lack of censorship.
Stockfish running on a 2-core computer is a formidable opponent.
vs. what was Stockfish running on?
vs. Stockfish?
Why do I think Stockfish was running on a 4 CPU box and AlphaZero running on something a few orders of magnitude greater?
>But what do the leftist billionaries get for their money? How does tightening & enforcing financial regs help Soros?
They get power.
>How does paying MORE taxes help the Steyer et al?
Billionaires don't really pay taxes. Especially not inheritance taxes. The start foundations like George Soros (or Bill Gates) and donate the bulk of their fortunes to the foundation and then have their children sit on the foundation still controlling the funds.
Billionaires own the means of production, so even when taxes do hit them, they just pass the taxes on to consumers as part of the cost of doing business.
Not QED. There doesn't appear to be any matter or energy falling in which is what we would expect if the universe was a black hole.
Then there is the whole other problem of the universe expanding vs. black holes evaporating.
>Fox News, even with Ailes gone, is still just a propaganda & apologist arm of the GOP.
...former National Security Advisor to Obama
So tell me what you think about CNN, MSNBC, ABC News, CBS News, NPR, NBC News, VICE News, WaPo, the NYT, etc?
>And there's no shortage of rightwing media. Conservative talk radio is an empire unto itself and there must be close to TWENTY high status former elected officials that have their own regular radio programs.
That's funny...and a bit hypocritical. Let's look at just a few of the politically connected left in the media:
(CNN) Chris Cuomo...brother to Andrew Cuomo (current left-wing governor of New York)
(ABC News) George Stephanopolous...former Clinton cabinet member
(CNN) Ben Rhodes
(ABC News) Ian Cameron - wife of Susan Rice of the "unmasking" fame in the Obama administration
(MSNBC) Chris Matthews - former speechwriter for Jimmy Carter and Chief of Staff for Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill
(CNN) Donna Brazil - Chair of the Democratic National Committee
(NPR WH correpondant) Ari Shapiro - married to Michael Gottlieb, a lawyer for the Obama legal team
(WaPo) Shailagh Murrah - communications director for Joe Biden as VP
(WSJ) Neil King - married to Shailagh Murrah
(NBC Today Show) Savannah Guthrie - co-host, married to Michael Feldman - chief of staff for Al Gore
(ABC/Univision) Matthew Jaffe - married to Katie Hogan, Obama's former deputy press secretary
Literally, the tip of the iceberg. There's a reason why a lot of the news headlines about Republicans read like they were written by the DNC and pushed out by all of the media outlets by friendly reporters - because they probably were - like White House correspondant Glenn Thrush's coordination with Podesta on a Hillary piece.
>The Koch brothers are ridiculously wealthy and were budgeting close to $900 million dollars in the last election and have been very active politically for decades.
>It's rumored they may spend $400 million in next year's mid-terms.
>Sheldon Adelson spent over $90 million trying to support Romney in 2012 and donated $25 million to Trump's SuperPAC.
It's chicken feed compared to what Soros is spending and just donated: http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/1.... And Soros is hardly the only left-wing billionaire. There is also Pierre Omidyar and Tom Steyer, not to mention the Ford Foundation which has been underwriting radical left-wing causes for the last 40 years or so with it's $11 billion endowment.
>Also I hope that the leftist astroturfers are as well-funded as the rightwingnutjob shit-disturbers.
The left is much better funded than the right in this regard.
This is just David Brock's empire alone: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DO...
Additionally, many of the "mainstream" media sources are really just DNC operatives. The news media is a turnstyle for Democratic campaign operatives.
>I have yet to see much in the way of proof.
Selection bias is alive and well. Google "left wing racism hoaxes" and start reading.
>I don't believe though that DNA should ever be used to convict someone.
I think we are saying the same thing more or less, in different ways. DNA evidence should be used as a diagnostic funnel. But 95% certainty is usually sufficient in court to secure a conviction by a jury or a judge - whether or not you or I agree with those odds.
>Is he or is he not a true example of rightwing hate? Simple question. Probably. But the point stands most of the "examples" of right wing hate have been hoaxes perpetrated by the "victims".
You should probably look up the definition of "most" vs the definition of "all".
>I have yet to see evidence that the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" rally was a "white nationalist" event at all; it seems some white nationalists chose independently to attend it and that's all it took.
I think the Charlottesville UTR was an astroturf event by the left. The organizer, Jason Kessler, had previously been active in Occupy Wall Street. But suddenly, after the election of Donald Trump went from being a strident leftist protesting our evil capitalist system to a white nationalist? Call me skeptical.
Additionally, there were plenty of eye witness accounts of "protestors" from both sides getting bussed in - in the same or adjoining busses and getting off at the same time.
The rally itself was permitted, but when the bulk of the UTR folks went to the rally point, the police at that point declared it unlawful and channeled the protestors (by buffeting them with riot shields) into the counter protestors where they were then assaulted with rocks, bottles, sticks, pepper spray, etc.
So basically, there was a widespread implicit (and probably explicit) coordination between the authorities, the UTR organizers, and the left to create an incident that would reflect poorly on the right. Does it mean that there weren't real white nationalists and racists present and involved? Of course not, but the entire thing stank of a setup. I think the local and state authorities along with the left (but I repeat myself) got exactly what they wanted where previously the evidence was overwhelmingly in the direction that it was the left carrying out violent attacks just prior (e.g., Berkeley).
>Nah, it's just the right wing constantly screaming about false flag operations, then getting caught staging them
Funny, almost all of the supposed recent racist attacks have been false flags set up by the supposed victims. For example, Lt. Gen. Jay Silveria excoriated the Air Force Academy class because of some racist graffiti that was written by...the person that "found it"...a black male.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... That's just the most recent version.
>The people who are obsessing over gender and a thousand separate pronouns? They're actually on the fringes of the left, and the rest of the left are kinda embarrassed by them.
Funny how that embarrassment doesn't seem to translate into any sort of action of slowing down the million different gender identity juggernaut. It's ridiculous in the extreme that pretty soon all "women's" athletic world records are going to be held by XY transgender "women". This is a direct output of actions by the left. Not the fringe folks you are embarrassed by, because fringes don't get comprehensive legislation and rules changes pushed through.
>Because they want to build a comprehensive and, more importantly, up to date image of what you look like for their facial recognition software.
With "they" being US intelligence agencies.
If the false positive rate is 5%, it is still a useful investigative and prosecutorial tool, even though in any moderately sized city you are going to get a LOT of false positives on DNA alone.
For example, if you can place the suspect in the vicinity of the crime and a motive for the crime along with DNA evidence that says >=95%, then that's a solid conviction.
However, if you are trawling 23andme.com or Ancestry.com databases for matches, and then just grabbing and prosecuting the first match, you've got some issues with your methodology.