The Guy From Pittsburgh ( tm ) Paranormal Discussion & News Forum » SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:34 am

President Kennedy screened this movie before his death & he felt every American should see it and take it as a warning of what might happen if one political agenda went too far to subvert the Constitution that we all should stand behind and swear allegiance to.

( A video posted in this thread says that JFK was concerned about right wing elements of our military who opposed his policies. ).

But many today, only pay lip service to and use it for their own personal or political agenda to gain power or control, on both sides of the spectrum while being intolerant of the views of the other side.
It amazes me that we have never had a military coup of our government but we are seeing a political coup, where one side has not just once but twice REFUSED to abide by the results of an election by the people once with the election of George W. Bush and once by the election of Donald J. Trump.

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. & John Frankenheimer worried about the rise of the right when this movie was made, yet they apparently did not worry about the future where the rise of the Left and an effort to overthrow the government if that President had policies and actions that they did not approve of as we see today.

Even Nixon who knew of the irregularities in the 1960 election, refused to contest the results because he knew it could tear the country apart.

Once the people have spoken at the polls, the results once certified should put an end to any oppostion or attempts to overturn the results.
But we have seen a cabal of those who are determined to undermine our Republic and our free election system, no matter what the cost to the country either now or in the future and it sets a dangerous precedent no matter what political side of the spectrum one is on, for without free and fair elections we will inevitably lose our freedoms and be controlled by mob rule. - GS

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-impeachment-pens-trump-solemn-somber

Last edited by Admin (1/16/2020 6:04 am)

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:36 am

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:39 am

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:45 am

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:46 am

Watch here as JFK talks about secrecy, secret societies and more and how he flet they were abhorrent.

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:54 am

JFK on the press, one sided coverage and secrecy and secret societies.

Could he have been referring to MJ - 12 as well & warning us as Eisenhower did about the military-industrial complex ?

Admin · 1/16/2020 5:56 am

Admin · 1/16/2020 6:07 am

Admin · 1/16/2020 6:34 am

The great myth & lie that Hillary Clinton won the election by the popular vote.

From the Washington Times and another source as well.

President Trump is right when he says illegals voted for Clinton & she would have LOST the popular vote without those illegal votes.

Below we see a study that shows that illegal aliens voted for Obama and one can assume that nothing changed when Clinton ran as well in 2016.

I spent 20 minutes trying to find a non Leftist Google result, all of which maintain that Clinton won the popular vote and all claiming that there was NO illegal alien voting or pro Clinton voter fraud.
Of course, we know that Google, being a leftist run company does its best to selectively show only left leaning results while hiding any right leaning or Conservative opinions that refute whatever position you are trying to find information on.

1)

Study supports Trump: 5.7 million non citizens may have cast illegal votes

By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times - Monday, June 19, 2017

A research group in New Jersey has taken a fresh look at postelection polling data and concluded that the number of non citizens voting illegally in U.S. elections is likely far greater than previous estimates.

As many as 5.7 million non citizens may have voted in the 2008 election, which put Barack Obama in the White House.

The research organization Just Facts, a widely cited, independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians, revealed its number-crunching in a report on national immigration.

Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team looked at data from an extensive Harvard/YouGov study that every two years questions a sample size of tens of thousands of voters. Some acknowledge they are noncitizens and are thus ineligible to vote.

Just Facts’ conclusions confront both sides in the illegal voting debate: those who say it happens a lot and those who say the problem nonexistent.

In one camp, there are groundbreaking studies by professors at Old Dominion University in Virginia who attempted to compile scientifically derived illegal voting numbers using the Harvard data, called the Cooperative Congressional Election Study.

On the other side are the professors who conducted the study and contended that “zero” noncitizens of about 18 million adults in the U.S. voted. The liberal mainstream media adopted this position and proclaimed the Old Dominion work was “debunked.”

The ODU professors, who stand by their work in the face of attacks from the left, concluded that in 2008 as few as 38,000 and as many as 2.8 million noncitizens voted.

Mr. Agresti’s analysis of the same polling data settled on much higher numbers. He estimated that as many as 7.9 million noncitizens were illegally registered that year and 594,000 to 5.7 million voted.

These numbers are more in line with the unverified estimates given by President Trump, who said the number of ballots cast by noncitizens was the reason he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton.

Last month, the president signed an executive order setting up a commission to try to find on-the-ground truth in illegal voting. Headed by Vice President Mike Pence, the panel also will look at outdated voter lists across the nation with names of dead people and multiple registrants.

For 2012, Just Facts said, 3.2 million to 5.6 million noncitizens were registered to vote and 1.2 million to 3.6 million of them voted.

Mr. Agresti lays out his reasoning in a series of complicated calculations, which he compares to U.S. Census Bureau figures for noncitizen residents. Polls show noncitizens vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

“The details are technical, but the figure I calculated is based on a more conservative margin of sampling error and a methodology that I consider to be more accurate,” Mr. Agresti told The Washington Times.

He believes the Harvard/YouGov researchers based their “zero” claim on two flawed assumptions. First, they assumed that people who said they voted and identified a candidate did not vote unless their names showed up in a database.

“This is illogical, because such databases are unlikely to verify voters who use fraudulent identities, and millions of noncitizens use them,” Mr. Agresti said.

He cites government audits that show large numbers of noncitizens use false IDs and Social Security numbers in order to function in the U.S., which could include voting.

Second, Harvard assumed that respondent citizens sometimes misidentified themselves as noncitizens but also concluded that noncitizens never misidentified themselves as citizens, Mr. Agresti said.

“This is irrational, because illegal immigrants often claim they are citizens in order to conceal the fact that they are in the U.S. illegally,” he said.

Some of the polled noncitizens denied they were registered to vote when publicly available databases show that they were, he said.

This conclusion, he said, is backed by the Harvard/YouGov study’s findings of consumer and vote data matches for 90 percent of participants but only 41 percent of noncitizen respondents.

As to why his numbers are higher than the besieged ODU professors’ study, Mr. Agresti said: “I calculated the margin of sampling error in a more cautious way to ensure greater confidence in the results, and I used a slightly different methodology that I think is more accurate.”

There is hard evidence outside of polling that noncitizens do vote. Conservative activists have conducted limited investigations in Maryland and Virginia that found thousands of aliens were registered.

These inquiries, such as comparing noncitizen jury pool rejections to voter rolls, captured just a snapshot. But conservatives say they show there is a much broader problem that a comprehensive probe by the Pence commission could uncover.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation, which fights voter fraud, released one of its most comprehensive reports last month.

Its investigation found that Virginia removed more than 5,500 noncitizens from voter lists, including 1,852 people who had cast more than 7,000 ballots. The people volunteered their status, most likely when acquiring driver’s licenses. The Public Interest Legal Foundation said there are likely many more illegal voters on Virginia’s rolls who have never admitted to being noncitizens.

Admin · 1/16/2020 6:35 am

More Proof That Voter Fraud Is Real, and Bipartisan
Aug 28th, 2019 4 min read
COMMENTARY BY

Jason Snead
@JasonWSnead

Former Senior Policy Analyst
Jason Snead was a senior policy analyst in the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.
Voters deserve better than cynical gamesmanship, and that is especially true when it comes to protecting the integrity of the electoral process. PAUL J. RICHARDS / Staff / Getty Images
Key Takeaways

At its core, people cheat in elections to further their preferred causes or to advance their own careers.

Whenever a right-leaning vote fraudster is identified, liberal activists and politicians relish needling conservatives over the alleged hypocrisy.

Whenever voter fraud occurs, it undermines the electoral process for everyone.

A California jury on Aug. 23 convicted a Mexican citizen of identity theft and voter fraud.

Two decades ago, Gustavo Araujo Lerma took on the identity of a deceased U.S. citizen and proceeded to vote illegally in a number of U.S. elections.

But Lerma didn’t vote for who you might expect.

Lerma is a Republican and an ardent backer of President Donald Trump. His lawyers even held up as evidence at trial a letter from Trump and Vice President Mike Pence thanking him for his support.

If nothing else, Lerma’s conviction is further proof that the incentives to commit voter fraud are truly bipartisan.

Heritage Foundation experts have long pointed out that voter fraud is not particular to one party or ideology. At its core, people cheat in elections to further their preferred causes or to advance their own careers, and there’s nothing inherently conservative or liberal about the desire to win.

That’s hardly a shocking revelation. Lerma is the latest—but hardly the first—Republican to be caught and convicted of election crimes. In fact, The Heritage Foundation’s voter fraud database contains many examples of fraud perpetrated by people on the political right.

Nevertheless, whenever a right-leaning vote fraudster is identified, liberal activists and politicians relish needling conservatives over the alleged hypocrisy.

They did it last year, when widespread absentee ballot tampering tainted the results of the race in North Carolina’s 9th Congressional District. (A special election for that seat will be held on Sept. 10.)

Some outlets are doing it now with the Lerma case, pointing out the irony that Trump—who has claimed that he most likely would have won the popular vote in 2016 if millions of illegal votes had not been cast against him—actually benefited from this very type of fraud.

But those reactions—though par for the course in today’s divisive politics—miss the point entirely.

If liberal politicians, pundits, and publications want to devote their time and attention to election integrity, they are welcome to—and should. But they ought to be focusing less on the party affiliation of the fraudster, and more on finding solutions to combat the fraud they perpetrate.

After all, whenever voter fraud occurs, it undermines the electoral process for everyone.

Fortunately, we know what policies work to combat voter fraud. Voter identification laws and programs to clean up wildly inaccurate voter rolls help to verify that only eligible individuals are voting, and that they are casting ballots in the jurisdictions where they actually reside.

Interstate cross-check programs, meanwhile, compare state voter rolls and help to identify duplicate registrations and single out double-voters.

These policies are not only common sense, they are urgently needed. A 2012 Pew study found that one out of every eight voter registrations were inaccurate, with 2.8 million people registered in two or more states.

Across the nation, hundreds of counties have more registered voters than residents. In June, California began a process of removing a staggering 5 million inactive registrations from its rolls—but only after it was sued by Judicial Watch.

It’s impossible to deny that individuals are exploiting vulnerabilities in the election process. The Heritage voter fraud database contains 1,217 proven instances of fraud, but that list isn’t comprehensive.

These cases—which are most likely just the tip of the iceberg—range from ineligible noncitizens casting illegal ballots to corrupt politicians buying votes and rigging their own elections.

Unfortunately, unless it’s a Republican committing the fraud, many liberal politicians and activists routinely insist that voter fraud is a figment of conservatives’ imaginations—or they assert that it’s so rare it’s inconsequential.

Yet, elections have been overturned due to fraud—sometimes, because of only a small handful of illegal ballots.

Liberals label policies such as requiring IDs at the polling place “racist,” and casually extend that derisive label to anyone who supports them.

The data are not on their side. Consider the latest from the Pew Research Center: In 2018, voter participation surged, and “last year’s midterm voters [were] the most racially and ethnically diverse ever.”

According to the Census Bureau, black, Hispanic, and Asian voter turnout all increased by double digits from 2014 to 2018. In Georgia—where Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams refused to concede defeat because of supposed “voter suppression”—black voter registration increased by more than 6 percentage points from the prior midterm, and actually topped white voters in percentage terms, 68.4% compared with 66.8%.

The bottom line? Accusations of voter suppression have no basis in fact.

So why, then, do we keep hearing them?

For some politicians and activists, election integrity is just too politically valuable. Turning the sanctity of the ballot box into a racially charged wedge issue animates the base, tars their opponents, and provides a convenient scapegoat for Election Day defeats.

Voters deserve better than cynical gamesmanship, and that is especially true when it comes to protecting the integrity of the electoral process.

Lerma’s conviction is a reminder that voter fraud can be committed on a bipartisan basis. Support for policies to combat it should be equally bipartisan.

Index
» Movies & tv. New and old.
» SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:34 am #1

SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:36 am #2

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:39 am #3

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:45 am #4

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:46 am #5

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:54 am #6

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 5:56 am #7

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 6:07 am #8

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 6:34 am #9

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

1/16/2020 6:35 am #10

Re: SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

Index
» Movies & tv. New and old.
» SEVEN DAYS IN MAY. 1964.

Board footera