S k a t e L o g     F o r u m
Inline Skating and Quad Roller Skating
Forum Hosts: Jessica Wright | Kathie Fry

FOLLOW US: Our Blog | Facebook | Twitter | Email    


Home - Forum Index - Africa Skating - Asia Skating - Europe Skating - Oceania Skating - Pan America Skating - Roller_Rinks - Friend the SkateLog Forum in Facebook - SkateLog Forum on Facebook

Forum Administrators: Jessica Wright and Kathie Fry | Email Us
Access code for buying and selling subforums: "skates"
How To Get a User Account and Posting Privileges in the SkateLog Forum
Use Google to Search the SkateLog Forum

Go Back   SkateLog Forum > Other Forums > Off-Topic Discussions
FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Off-Topic Discussions You can use this forum to talk about any non-skating topic you want.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old August 7th, 2017, 05:38 PM   #261
fierocious1
Senior Member
 
fierocious1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ursle View Post
Why do you make stuff up?


This is a copy of what Mueller was assigned to do, it doesn't have any limitations, your lack of ability to detect sarcasm comes into play when you watch The deputy attorney general say it's not a fishing expedition, he's being sarcastic, and it's not a fishing expedition, it's a matter of catching treasonous people for espionage, and it's ramping up.



(©ffice of tqe cp tiortte ®eneral l!lu l1in on, . . 20530
APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL
TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS
By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Atto ey General, including 28 U.S.C. §§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian govemmenfs e orts to inter re in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as llows:
(a) Robert S. Mueller III is appointed t serve as Specia] Counsel r the United States
Department of Justice.
(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation con nned by then-FBI Director James 8. Co ey in testimony be re the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i) any links an or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly om the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is
authorized to prosecute deral crimes arising om the investigation of these matters. (d) Sections 600.4 through 600. l 0 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are
applicable to the Special Counsel.
1
Date '
ORDERNO. 3915-2017

Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein said Sunday that the expanding investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election is continuing apace, even as President Trump dismissed the probe as “a total fabrication.”

Rosenstein said special counsel Robert S. Mueller III can investigate any crimes that he might discover within the scope of his probe, but the deputy attorney general would not discuss which individuals are the subject of their inquiry. The interview comes days after Trump said he believes it would be inappropriate for Mueller to dig into Trump family finances.

“The special counsel is subject to the rules and regulations of the Department of Justice, and we don’t engage in fishing expeditions,” Rosenstein said when asked about the probe in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”

Rosenstein declined to comment on reports that Mueller is using a grand jury in a court in Washington to aid in his investigation but he said that such a step is a routine part of “many investigations.”
That's amazing! Wonder why those guys didn't spend this much effort digging into bozo or killary? Don't tell me they are squeaky clean.... LOL, they were in the dems pockets getting paid as usual, that's why...
fierocious1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 20th, 2017, 03:18 PM   #262
ursle
Street Skater
 
ursle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 2,321
Default

Howard Dean: based on new evidence, Russia may have installed Donald Trump with “falsified votes”



Back in November, I conducted an in-depth look at the vote totals in the swing states that Donald Trump shockingly won, and I came away with the distinct impression that they didn’t look like naturally occurring numbers. The trouble: I could only demonstrate that the voting results looked falsified, not that they had been falsified. But based on new evidence, a major Democratic Party figure believes those vote totals may have indeed been falsified by Russian hackers.



It started yesterday when Time Magazine published new evidence that Russian hackers altered voter data, in an in-depth must-read article (link). The key quote from the article: “Congressional investigators are probing whether any of this stolen private information made its way to the Trump campaign.” This led former Vermont Governor and former DNC Chair Howard Dean to chime in.



Governor Dean’s assessment: “This is much more serious than previous information. This opens the door to the idea that Trump may have won with falsified votes” (link). This distinction is crucial. Up to now, the Trump-Russia investigation has centered around the role that Russian hackers played in accessing voter data, and allegedly informing the Trump campaign as to which voters and states it should target with its campaign efforts – thus using illegal tactics to convince people to vote in a certain manner. But now we’re talking about Russian hackers having actually changed people’s votes without their knowledge.



As I pointed out last year, from a strictly mathematical standpoint, the results in most swing states ranged from overwhelmingly unlikely to impossible. The odds were infinitesimal of Trump conveniently winning every swing state he needed, even while badly losing the overall popular vote nationwide (akin to a football team scoring no touchdowns but winning by scoring ten safeties). It was even more suspicious that he won every one of those swing states by the same one percent of the vote, just enough to avoid an automatic recount. If this new evidence ends up proving Russian hackers did change people’s votes, then Donald Trump was not elected President of the United States.
ursle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 20th, 2017, 09:00 PM   #263
rufusprime99
Ninja Naked Mole Rat
 
rufusprime99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: L.A., Ca
Posts: 5,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ursle View Post
Howard Dean: based on new evidence, Russia may have installed Donald Trump with “falsified votes”



Back in November, I conducted an in-depth look at the vote totals in the swing states that Donald Trump shockingly won, and I came away with the distinct impression that they didn’t look like naturally occurring numbers. The trouble: I could only demonstrate that the voting results looked falsified, not that they had been falsified. But based on new evidence, a major Democratic Party figure believes those vote totals may have indeed been falsified by Russian hackers.



It started yesterday when Time Magazine published new evidence that Russian hackers altered voter data, in an in-depth must-read article (link). The key quote from the article: “Congressional investigators are probing whether any of this stolen private information made its way to the Trump campaign.” This led former Vermont Governor and former DNC Chair Howard Dean to chime in.



Governor Dean’s assessment: “This is much more serious than previous information. This opens the door to the idea that Trump may have won with falsified votes” (link). This distinction is crucial. Up to now, the Trump-Russia investigation has centered around the role that Russian hackers played in accessing voter data, and allegedly informing the Trump campaign as to which voters and states it should target with its campaign efforts – thus using illegal tactics to convince people to vote in a certain manner. But now we’re talking about Russian hackers having actually changed people’s votes without their knowledge.



As I pointed out last year, from a strictly mathematical standpoint, the results in most swing states ranged from overwhelmingly unlikely to impossible. The odds were infinitesimal of Trump conveniently winning every swing state he needed, even while badly losing the overall popular vote nationwide (akin to a football team scoring no touchdowns but winning by scoring ten safeties). It was even more suspicious that he won every one of those swing states by the same one percent of the vote, just enough to avoid an automatic recount. If this new evidence ends up proving Russian hackers did change people’s votes, then Donald Trump was not elected President of the United States.
Reality check sweetie: In the State that did a recount, Trump got MORE votes. And a side note, in california, where Hilary won, voter rolls had more than 100% of eligible adults registered. This is actually worse than it sounds. Few districts will have 100% voter registration of eligible adults registered. This might mean that there are twice the number of registered voters in Ca than there should be. That is not a smoke and mirrors issue, it is a real one. CA votes could be dumped completely due to voter fraud, thus giving Trump the popular vote and the electoral college. No need to dump californias votes as Trump won anyway. But it does shine a light on how BIG Trumps win is. NOT just squeaking by by the electoral college, but winning it all.
__________________
Don't let people live in your head rent free. ~princessfluffhead~ BontQRL/InvaderDA45: Seba-FRX: Alkali CA9
rufusprime99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 20th, 2017, 10:38 PM   #264
ursle
Street Skater
 
ursle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 2,321
Default

Let's just fact check your BS


Fact check: Do 11 California counties have more voters than eligible adults?



California eligible voters questioned In a letter to California Secretary of State Alex Padilla on Aug. 1, 2017, Judicial Watch alleges that some counties have more registered voters than eligible adults.


California Secretary of State Alex Padilla is rebutting allegations by a Washington, D.C., group that 11 California counties, including San Diego County, have more registered voters than adults eligible to vote.

Padilla is calling the claim “baseless” even as the organization, Judicial Watch, threatens to sue the state if it does not adjust its voter records.


Judicial Watch did not offer any data to back up its claim, and it declined to give the Los Angeles Times any details about its analysis, saying it may soon sue.

The claim, which Judicial Watch made in an Aug. 1 letter, has attracted curiosity and criticism and comes as Padilla has expressed a reluctance to hand over voter registration data to a White House panel tasked with investigating President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of mass voter fraud in the 2016 election.

The letter and the claim by Judicial Watch had not drawn considerable attention until the conservative-leaning site Breitbart News published a story about it and a California assemblyman, Travis Allen, R-Huntington Beach, on Monday shared it on Twitter with the question, “How is this possible?”


A report in The Sacramento Bee offered this terse reply: “Short answer: It’s not.”

Here is a breakdown of how and why this claim gained wider attention and how election officials in California explain the discrepancy in voter registration numbers.

What exactly does Judicial Watch claim?

Judicial Watch says 11 counties in California are in violation of a section of the National Voter Registration Act that requires states to do a “reasonable list maintenance” of voter registration lists.

To support its argument, it compares population numbers in the 2011-2015 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey to California’s registered voters — which combines those on active and inactive voter lists. By that calculation, 11 counties have more total registered voters than adults over the age of 18.

“In our experience, these kinds of registration rates indicate a failure to comply with the voter list maintenance requirements of the NVRA,” the letter says, adding that such inaccuracies undermine public confidence in the electoral process.

What do election officials say about it?

The question revolves around the inclusion of California voters who are deemed “inactive.”

Inactive voter lists are made up of people who may have had their mail ballots or other voter documents returned as undeliverable, The Sacramento Bee explained. That can happen when someone moves or dies.

Here’s how the Bee elaborated on that:

Judicial Watch’s claim rests on its inclusion of “inactive voters” – people who have been removed from active rolls after a mail ballot, voter guide or other official document was returned as undeliverable – usually as a result of moving. They aren’t reflected in turnout tallies or signature-gathering requirements, don’t receive election materials, and are ignored by campaigns.

Los Angeles County’s registrar of voters, Dean Logan, explained to the Bee that the names on the inactive voter list are kept as a “fail-safe” so as to not disenfranchise or discourage voters.

Combining “inactive voter” and “active voter” lists could result in a higher total number of registered voters that Judicial Watch says raises suspicions.

Logan and Gail Pellerin, the Santa Cruz County registrar of voters, told the Los Angeles Times that very few people on the “inactive voter” list actually show up to vote. As few as 12 people, out of 44,172 people on Santa Cruz County’s inactive list, showed up to vote in November, Pellerin said.

Update: San Diego County’s registrar of voters, Michael Vu, on Thursday echoed the logic of his counterparts in Los Angeles and Santa Cruz counties.

He added that, “without sounding redundant to what my colleagues have stated, I would add that list maintenance of the San Diego voter rolls occurs diligently and on a daily basis and is done in accordance with State and federal law.”

What are the 11 counties being mentioned?

Imperial County (102 percent)
Lassen County (102 percent)
Los Angeles County (112 percent)
Monterey County (104 percent)
San Diego County (138 percent)
San Francisco County (114 percent)
San Mateo County (111 percent)
Santa Cruz County (109 percent)
Solano County (111 percent)
Stanislaus County (102 percent)
Yolo County (110 percent)
What are people saying about the claim?

Allen shared a Breitbart News story about the letter to his more than 6,000 followers on Twitter, but the biggest push came from Alex Jones whose Infowars online show attracts millions of viewers.

On Tuesday, Jones shared it with his more than 680,000 Twitter followers with the hashtag #WakeUpAmerica.


Some other conservatives who shared the story used the opportunity to criticize California’s reluctance to turn over voter data to Trump’s election commission.



Padilla and others, however, have countered that the commission — and Judicial Watch, too — is motivated by an agenda to upend the voting rights of Americans.

“To me, it's clearly part of a concerted effort, a continued attack on voting rights and setting the stage for the Trump administration to roll back voting rights,” Padilla told the Los Angeles Times.




So what is going to happen next?

Padilla has now twice rejected the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity’s request for voter data, joining a number of other states, and it’s unclear what the special panel will do to obtain the information.

Judicial Watch, however, gave Padilla 14 days from the date of the Aug. 1 letter to respond to its request to rectify the discrepancies between active and inactive voter data or else the group said it would sue.
ursle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:05 AM   #265
fierocious1
Senior Member
 
fierocious1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ursle View Post
Let's just fact check your BS


Fact check: Do 11 California counties have more voters than eligible adults?



California eligible voters questioned In a letter to California Secretary of State Alex Padilla on Aug. 1, 2017, Judicial Watch alleges that some counties have more registered voters than eligible adults.


California Secretary of State Alex Padilla is rebutting allegations by a Washington, D.C., group that 11 California counties, including San Diego County, have more registered voters than adults eligible to vote.

Padilla is calling the claim “baseless” even as the organization, Judicial Watch, threatens to sue the state if it does not adjust its voter records.


Judicial Watch did not offer any data to back up its claim, and it declined to give the Los Angeles Times any details about its analysis, saying it may soon sue.

The claim, which Judicial Watch made in an Aug. 1 letter, has attracted curiosity and criticism and comes as Padilla has expressed a reluctance to hand over voter registration data to a White House panel tasked with investigating President Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claims of mass voter fraud in the 2016 election.

The letter and the claim by Judicial Watch had not drawn considerable attention until the conservative-leaning site Breitbart News published a story about it and a California assemblyman, Travis Allen, R-Huntington Beach, on Monday shared it on Twitter with the question, “How is this possible?”


A report in The Sacramento Bee offered this terse reply: “Short answer: It’s not.”

Here is a breakdown of how and why this claim gained wider attention and how election officials in California explain the discrepancy in voter registration numbers.

What exactly does Judicial Watch claim?

Judicial Watch says 11 counties in California are in violation of a section of the National Voter Registration Act that requires states to do a “reasonable list maintenance” of voter registration lists.

To support its argument, it compares population numbers in the 2011-2015 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey to California’s registered voters — which combines those on active and inactive voter lists. By that calculation, 11 counties have more total registered voters than adults over the age of 18.

“In our experience, these kinds of registration rates indicate a failure to comply with the voter list maintenance requirements of the NVRA,” the letter says, adding that such inaccuracies undermine public confidence in the electoral process.

What do election officials say about it?

The question revolves around the inclusion of California voters who are deemed “inactive.”

Inactive voter lists are made up of people who may have had their mail ballots or other voter documents returned as undeliverable, The Sacramento Bee explained. That can happen when someone moves or dies.

Here’s how the Bee elaborated on that:

Judicial Watch’s claim rests on its inclusion of “inactive voters” – people who have been removed from active rolls after a mail ballot, voter guide or other official document was returned as undeliverable – usually as a result of moving. They aren’t reflected in turnout tallies or signature-gathering requirements, don’t receive election materials, and are ignored by campaigns.

Los Angeles County’s registrar of voters, Dean Logan, explained to the Bee that the names on the inactive voter list are kept as a “fail-safe” so as to not disenfranchise or discourage voters.

Combining “inactive voter” and “active voter” lists could result in a higher total number of registered voters that Judicial Watch says raises suspicions.

Logan and Gail Pellerin, the Santa Cruz County registrar of voters, told the Los Angeles Times that very few people on the “inactive voter” list actually show up to vote. As few as 12 people, out of 44,172 people on Santa Cruz County’s inactive list, showed up to vote in November, Pellerin said.

Update: San Diego County’s registrar of voters, Michael Vu, on Thursday echoed the logic of his counterparts in Los Angeles and Santa Cruz counties.

He added that, “without sounding redundant to what my colleagues have stated, I would add that list maintenance of the San Diego voter rolls occurs diligently and on a daily basis and is done in accordance with State and federal law.”

What are the 11 counties being mentioned?

Imperial County (102 percent)
Lassen County (102 percent)
Los Angeles County (112 percent)
Monterey County (104 percent)
San Diego County (138 percent)
San Francisco County (114 percent)
San Mateo County (111 percent)
Santa Cruz County (109 percent)
Solano County (111 percent)
Stanislaus County (102 percent)
Yolo County (110 percent)
What are people saying about the claim?

Allen shared a Breitbart News story about the letter to his more than 6,000 followers on Twitter, but the biggest push came from Alex Jones whose Infowars online show attracts millions of viewers.

On Tuesday, Jones shared it with his more than 680,000 Twitter followers with the hashtag #WakeUpAmerica.


Some other conservatives who shared the story used the opportunity to criticize California’s reluctance to turn over voter data to Trump’s election commission.



Padilla and others, however, have countered that the commission — and Judicial Watch, too — is motivated by an agenda to upend the voting rights of Americans.

“To me, it's clearly part of a concerted effort, a continued attack on voting rights and setting the stage for the Trump administration to roll back voting rights,” Padilla told the Los Angeles Times.




So what is going to happen next?

Padilla has now twice rejected the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity’s request for voter data, joining a number of other states, and it’s unclear what the special panel will do to obtain the information.

Judicial Watch, however, gave Padilla 14 days from the date of the Aug. 1 letter to respond to its request to rectify the discrepancies between active and inactive voter data or else the group said it would sue.
Sounded like a democrat scam to me.....
fierocious1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.