How to Disenfranchise People by Claiming Voter Fraud

For quite awhile now, DJ Trump has been saying that the election was rigged. I, along with many others, at first thought this was an ego-driven move, but now I finally see it for what it was — an excellent chess move. If he lost the election, he could claim voter fraud. If he won the election, he could continue to claim voter fraud, because once you’re president, it’s really hard to get you out.

So, why would he do this, though? Just for ego? Nope.

There’s plenty of evidence to show that DJ Trump knew the fix was in on the election, including his reported collusion to some extent with the Russians. This would lead to confidence that he could prove election fraud. If he lost, he would claim interference, hacking, etc., and then miraculously uncover evidence of that right away, perhaps being able to invalidate the election results long before all of the results were in. On the other hand, if he won, he would use those claims to change the rules surrounding elections.

If we examine this from today’s perspective, we can see that DJ Trump has been saying that millions of people voted illegally, while still claiming that his election was legitimate. The news agencies have debunked his claims, again and again.

Of course, this claim is simply discarded when not convenient, as in rejecting recount efforts.

“All available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud or mistake,” Trump’s legal team said in their objection to the Michigan recount.

Don’t let the hand-waving distract you.

Keep your eye on the ball. DJ Trump keeps saying that millions of people committed voter fraud. Now, he wants an investigation. What could be wrong with this? He will find some amount of voter fraud, (because there always is), and no matter how minimal, he will use that evidence to create more rigid rules about who can vote.

Imagine DJ Trump saying, “You have to be a citizen to vote. If you cannot prove your US citizenship at the time of voting, you can’t vote.”

Currently, even in highly restricted states, you can still cast a provisional ballot if you don’t have your identification with you. If someone working at the polls knows you personally, you are allowed to vote. For many states, if you have signed a form at registration time, or provide a utility bill, you are allowed to vote.

Under the new rules who would be eligible to vote?

Not a single person who has had a problem with tax returns over the last 5 years. Not a single person who doesn’t have a US Passport. Not a single person who doesn’t put in the time and effort well in advance of an election to prove their citizenship. The people with passports have them because they have traveled outside of the United States. These people have money, by definition.

According to the State Department, there are 113,431,943 valid passports in circulation, which means 36% of Americans own a valid passport (and therefore 64% do not).

Can we really just change registration rules?

Changing how registration works statewide can happen relatively easily. The Election Assistance Commission (EAC) was established in 2002 to develop guidance for states to meet the requirements of HAVA (the Help America Vote Act).

The four EAC commissioners are appointed by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. EAC is required to submit an annual report to Congress as well as testify periodically about HAVA progress and related issues. The commission also holds public meetings and hearings to inform the public about its progress and activities.

The FBI’s website clearly details what election crimes are. In that list, appears the following:

Civil rights violations

  • Someone threatens a voter with physical or economic harm unless the voter casts his ballot in a particular way;
  • Someone tries to prevent qualified voters from getting to the polls in a federal election;
  • A scheme exists to prevent minorities from voting.

Voter/ballot fraud

  • A voter intentionally gives false information when registering to vote;
  • A voter receives money or something of value in exchange for voting in a federal election or registering to vote;
  • Someone votes more than once in a federal election (e.g., someone mails in absentee ballots in the names of dead people);
  • An election official corrupts his or her office to benefit a candidate or party (e.g., lets unqualified voters cast ballots).

In our cry to discover election fraud during this last election cycle, let us be especially diligent about the italicized items above, and determine if, in fact, any of those federal crimes were committed.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.