Claire McCaskel gets big boost from democrat judge.

marke · Oct 9, 2018

Democrat loyalist activist Judge Richard Callahan has struck down key provisions of Missouri's voter ID law so that democrats can vote illegally without detection. This is a huge win for Democrat McCaskill.

On the national front, Kavanaugh represents a serious threat to ongoing democrat plans to keep voter fraud avenues open. America had better wake up and put a stop to this corruption or America will lose it's liberty and envied way of life at the hands of ruthless insurrectionists.

Grokmaster · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Democrat loyalist activist Judge Richard Callahan has struck down key provisions of Missouri's voter ID law so that democrats can vote illegally without detection. This is a huge win for Democrat McCaskill.

On the national front, Kavanaugh represents a serious threat to ongoing democrat plans to keep voter fraud avenues open. America had better wake up and put a stop to this corruption or America will lose it's liberty and envied way of life at the hands of ruthless insurrectionists.

What are the exact provisions he voided?

independentusa · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Democrat loyalist activist Judge Richard Callahan has struck down key provisions of Missouri's voter ID law so that democrats can vote illegally without detection. This is a huge win for Democrat McCaskill.

On the national front, Kavanaugh represents a serious threat to ongoing democrat plans to keep voter fraud avenues open. America had better wake up and put a stop to this corruption or America will lose it's liberty and envied way of life at the hands of ruthless insurrectionists.

How about the state of Indiana that admitted removing 20,000 voters off voting rolls against a court order. You people love it when the court agrees with you and hate it when they don't. In Wisco where i live they estimate that almost 200 thousand legal voters have been removed by use of very restrictive ID laws. In fact two elections ago, right after the change in the law my name was removed from the voter rolls and I had to re-register. Why, no one knew as I tried to find out. It was like they just removed names here and there at random.

marke · Oct 10, 2018

Grokmaster said:
What are the exact provisions he voided?

The democrat judge shot down a requirement that voters present an ID to insure they are who they say they are. What this means is that frauds can vote for dead people and otherwise vote illegally without getting caught.

Middle_Ground · Oct 10, 2018

Talk about hyperbolic!
The judge threw out 1 part of the law, 1 part don't worry Missouri still requires id to vote.
Here is a link from a Missouri newspaper

Judge rules part of Missouri voter ID law unconstitutional | The Kansas City Star

Middle_Ground · Oct 10, 2018

Grokmaster said:
What are the exact provisions he voided?

They don't want to answers that question because this thread is fake news.

Tanngrisnir · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Democrat loyalist activist Judge Richard Callahan has struck down key provisions of Missouri's voter ID law so that democrats can vote illegally without detection. This is a huge win for Democrat McCaskill.

On the national front, Kavanaugh represents a serious threat to ongoing democrat plans to keep voter fraud avenues open. America had better wake up and put a stop to this corruption or America will lose it's liberty and envied way of life at the hands of ruthless insurrectionists.

How is he a loyalist and/or an activist?

What voter fraud 'avenues' are you talking about?

It's sad that you think your way of life is threatened by 'insurrectionists' who don't actually exist.

ludin · Oct 10, 2018

I have no problem with the ruling. The law was written very badly.

“The affidavit plainly requires the voter to swear that they do not possess a form of personal identification approved for voting while simultaneously presenting to the election authority a form of personal identification that is approved,” the ruling says.

Had the affidavit just said "I am who i say i am under penalty of perjury" then it would have been fine.

The ruling upheld the portion of the law that allows voters without any form of ID to cast a provisional ballot that would only be counted if they returned before the polls close and presented a proper ID or if election officials could determine the voter’s signature on the ballot matched the signature on file with their registration.

Middle_Ground · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
The democrat judge shot down a requirement that voters present an ID to insure they are who they say they are. What this means is that frauds can vote for dead people and otherwise vote illegally without getting caught.

Outright lie. Did you actually read what the judge ordered or did you just grab a headline?

marke · Oct 10, 2018

independentusa said:
How about the state of Indiana that admitted removing 20,000 voters off voting rolls against a court order. You people love it when the court agrees with you and hate it when they don't. In Wisco where i live they estimate that almost 200 thousand legal voters have been removed by use of very restrictive ID laws. In fact two elections ago, right after the change in the law my name was removed from the voter rolls and I had to re-register. Why, no one knew as I tried to find out. It was like they just removed names here and there at random.

Federal law requires states to purge their records every 10 years or so. The Obama administration blocked such purges regularly in every state. Voting rolls accumulate names of people who died, who moved away, or who are no longer eligible to vote, and those names should be removed from the rolls. Keeping the names of ineligible voters on the rolls makes no sense. Such protection of ineligible voters registered to vote provides a deep pool of names which can be used by others illegally to vote in their place. Democrats oppose efforts to protect voting rights while republicans oppose efforts to keep avenues for voting fraud open. Go figger.

The Indiana judge who blocked the Indiana updating of voter registries was a black democrat woman appointed by Barack Obama. Go figger again.

marke · Oct 10, 2018

Tanngrisnir said:
How is he a loyalist and/or an activist?

What voter fraud 'avenues' are you talking about?

It's sad that you think your way of life is threatened by 'insurrectionists' who don't actually exist.

Democrats and supporters of the democrat agenda do not take voter fraud seriously and fight tooth and nail to keep anyone from investigating voter fraud claims and will battle to the death to keep laws from being passed to shut down potential voter fraud. Voter fraud is widespread but so are lying and ignorance. Do dead people vote? No, but crooks do vote using names of dead people. These crooks need to be stopped.

The NC Board of Elections revealed that more than 35,000 people may have double voted in the 2012 election. The Board also discovered that at least 81 dead people had voted.

https://abc11.com/news-evidence-of-voter-fraud-in-nc-alleged/23005/

marke · Oct 10, 2018

Middle_Ground said:
Outright lie. Did you actually read what the judge ordered or did you just grab a headline?

Judge Callahan did not throw the ID law out but he did side with the leftist democrat advocacy group Priorities USA to keep precincts from asking for proof of identity at the polls. That means anyone can vote for any name on the roll without having to prove they are who they say they are. This allows for potential fraud to take place which is a boost to McCaskill and other democrats.

Tanngrisnir · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Democrats and supporters of the democrat agenda do not take voter fraud seriously and fight tooth and nail to keep anyone from investigating voter fraud claims and will battle to the death to keep laws from being passed to shut down potential voter fraud. Voter fraud is widespread but so are lying and ignorance. Do dead people vote? No, but crooks do vote using names of dead people. These crooks need to be stopped.

The NC Board of Elections revealed that more than 35,000 people may have double voted in the 2012 election. The Board also discovered that at least 81 dead people had voted.

https://abc11.com/news-evidence-of-voter-fraud-in-nc-alleged/23005/

There is no credible evidence of voter fraud, and you cannot demonstrate that there is. He isn't a loyalist/activist and you cannot demonstrate that he is.

Thanks for admitting you lied.

Middle_Ground · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Judge Callahan did not throw the ID law out but he did side with the leftist democrat advocacy group Priorities USA to keep precincts from asking for proof of identity at the polls. That means anyone can vote for any name on the roll without having to prove they are who they say they are. This allows for potential fraud to take place which is a boost to McCaskill and other democrats.

Okay maybe I'm reading this wrong
Where does it say any of what you just did?

The ruling upheld the portion of the law that allows voters without any form of ID to cast a provisional ballot that would only be counted if they returned before the polls close and presented a proper ID or if election officials could determine the voter’s signature on the ballot matched the signature on file with their registration.

What I'm reading is voters that didn't have id before could vote and be counted anyway by signing an affidavit. Now they can't. That sounds like it's even more restrictive now. For a vote to be counted now you have to bring back proper id before the poles close or your signature must match your registration.

How/where did the judge say people don't have to present Id?

lwf · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Democrat loyalist activist Judge Richard Callahan has struck down key provisions of Missouri's voter ID law so that democrats can vote illegally without detection. This is a huge win for Democrat McCaskill.

On the national front, Kavanaugh represents a serious threat to ongoing democrat plans to keep voter fraud avenues open. America had better wake up and put a stop to this corruption or America will lose it's liberty and envied way of life at the hands of ruthless insurrectionists.

The purpose is not to keep voter fraud avenues open so that democrats can vote illegally. This is right wing propaganda. The truth is that actual voter fraud has so minor an effect on election results that it's statistically insignificant. However, disenfranchising large groups of minority voters, (who tend to vote democrat more than republican,) can have a statistically significant effect on election results. And voter ID laws (along with gerrymandering) are very effective suppressing minority votes.

joko104 · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
The democrat judge shot down a requirement that voters present an ID to insure they are who they say they are. What this means is that frauds can vote for dead people and otherwise vote illegally without getting caught.

What it does is allow Democrat precinct employees to cast as many votes as the want, using any name of anyone who does vote. They literally can cast thousands of votes themselves merely by putting a couple voting machines in a backroom.

lwf · Oct 10, 2018

joko104 said:
What it does is allow Democrat precinct employees to cast as many votes as the want, using any name of anyone who does vote. They literally can cast thousands of votes themselves merely by putting a couple voting machines in a backroom.

How does the law allow that?

Grokmaster · Oct 10, 2018

independentusa said:
How about the state of Indiana that admitted removing 20,000 voters off voting rolls against a court order. You people love it when the court agrees with you and hate it when they don't. In Wisco where i live they estimate that almost 200 thousand legal voters have been removed by use of very restrictive ID laws. In fact two elections ago, right after the change in the law my name was removed from the voter rolls and I had to re-register. Why, no one knew as I tried to find out. It was like they just removed names here and there at random.

Link to your claims.

The Indiana voter rolls were purged of FRAUDULENT and OTHER no longer legal names; a DEMOCRAT JUDGE tried to preserve that aspect of the well-documented INDIANA DEMOCRAT VOTER/ELECTION FRAUD operations.

Fomenting gender confusion in young children is not really a "family value".

marke · Oct 10, 2018

Tanngrisnir said:
There is no credible evidence of voter fraud, and you cannot demonstrate that there is. He isn't a loyalist/activist and you cannot demonstrate that he is.

Thanks for admitting you lied.

Democrats are either lying themselves or "acting stupidly," to borrow one of Obama's phrases, if they reject without refutation the clear reports of fraud like the one I listed from the NC Board of Elections.

Tanngrisnir · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
Democrats are either lying themselves or "acting stupidly," to borrow one of Obama's phrases, if they reject without refutation the clear reports of fraud like the one I listed from the NC Board of Elections.

The one from the NC Board of Elections was all supposition, not a 'clear report of fraud'.

Please try again.

marke · Oct 10, 2018

Middle_Ground said:
Okay maybe I'm reading this wrong
Where does it say any of what you just did?

The ruling upheld the portion of the law that allows voters without any form of ID to cast a provisional ballot that would only be counted if they returned before the polls close and presented a proper ID or if election officials could determine the voter’s signature on the ballot matched the signature on file with their registration.

What I'm reading is voters that didn't have id before could vote and be counted anyway by signing an affidavit. Now they can't. That sounds like it's even more restrictive now. For a vote to be counted now you have to bring back proper id before the poles close or your signature must match your registration.

How/where did the judge say people don't have to present Id?

A Missouri judge issued a ruling on Tuesday prohibiting election authorities from requiring voters to present a photo identification card in order to cast a ballot, a move that blocks key parts of the state's voter ID law.

https://www.axios.com/judge-strikes...law-a9b86776-433a-45ec-89ae-c7531e32b860.html

Missouri lawmakers passed a voting protection law. The Obamanite judge struck down key provisions of the law he saw as a threat to democrat voting. Plain and simple.

marke · Oct 10, 2018

lwf said:
The purpose is not to keep voter fraud avenues open so that democrats can vote illegally. This is right wing propaganda. The truth is that actual voter fraud has so minor an effect on election results that it's statistically insignificant. However, disenfranchising large groups of minority voters, (who tend to vote democrat more than republican,) can have a statistically significant effect on election results. And voter ID laws (along with gerrymandering) are very effective suppressing minority votes.

Democrats claim voter protections disenfranchise minority democrat voters. So what if they do? Let blacks drive without drivers' licenses because they have trouble obtaining them? Should America not safeguard our elections processes just because democrats claim safeguards will hurt democrats in elections?

marke · Oct 10, 2018

Tanngrisnir said:
The one from the NC Board of Elections was all supposition, not a 'clear report of fraud'.

Please try again.

The reported findings of voter fraud by the NC Elections board was a lot like a Christine Ford allegation, not going to be challenged by one side but never disproved by the other.

Middle_Ground · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
A Missouri judge issued a ruling on Tuesday prohibiting election authorities from requiring voters to present a photo identification card in order to cast a ballot, a move that blocks key parts of the state's voter ID law.

https://www.axios.com/judge-strikes...law-a9b86776-433a-45ec-89ae-c7531e32b860.html

Missouri lawmakers passed a voting protection law. The Obamanite judge struck down key provisions of the law he saw as a threat to democrat voting. Plain and simple.

Okay I understand you have an agenda that you really want to believe. But if it were me being misled I would write the editor if the article you just posted a complain.
Here is an article with the actual court ruling attached.
https://krcgtv.com/news/local/judge-strikes-down-portion-of-state-voter-id-law

Along with several others from Missouri that refute that axios article.
https://fox2now.com/2018/10/09/missouri-to-appeal-ruling-against-voter-id-law/

Judge rules part of Missouri voter ID law unconstitutional | The Kansas City Star

I hope you take the time to see you were misled.

Tanngrisnir · Oct 10, 2018

marke said:
The reported findings of voter fraud by the NC Elections board was a lot like a Christine Ford allegation, not going to be challenged by one side but never disproved by the other.

They didn't find voter fraud. They presupposed it.