Did foreigners affect the out come of the last election

Casting about with a large number of excuses why the serial liar Hillary lost, the radical left have pretty much settled on ------------the Russians did it. But----------------of course that is highly questionable.

However in the election where democrats are forever ranting about the popular vote, foreigners did influence the out come. Look at all the illegals that voted in especially Calif, and I am sure other states too.

Why are not the liberals on this forum denouncing these illegal foreigners for influencing the out come of the popular vote.?????????????????

 

Yes! Look at them.....wait. Where? I don't see any. Can you point them out? Point out a shred of evidence that there was some mass scale voter fraud? Anything more than a couple of cases out of 100,000,000?

 

Apparently you are not up on current events. Almost all people admit that in Calif way over a million illegals voted.

 

There is nothing to denounce Is my guess why us Democrat's are not denouncing-However,that being said---There is "evidence" that Russia interferred with the sovereignty of our election process in favor of trump-it is remarkable that you choose to overlook the severity of this as long as your guy got in--dishonestly & illegally----???????????????????????????

 

So how do you feel about the DNC dishonestly and illegally interfering with US elections.

 

Post the names of the "illegal voters".

All "over a million" of them

If you can't do that, then your post is just hilariously misinformed RW Fever Swamp BS.

Post their names.

If you can't, you will be admitting you are posting threads based on BS.

Waiting on the names.

Surely, you aren't willing to admit your OP is based on unprovable BS? Are you?

Post the names.

 

What does the evidence look like?

We need to see documents or methods.

I got zero contacts from Russia. How many did you receive?

 

I ask Democrats to post the names of those who they call voter suppressed too. Works out they never name any names.

Here are instructions to illegals as to how they can vote though.

[video=youtube;9yf4FqcVK_0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yf4FqcVK_0[/video]

 

That bit of fake news has never been supported by actual evidence.

Either stop posting it or cite your evidence.

 

How so?

 

Well, of course you are going on the fact that the investigations are not over yet & we don't have all the information except for the FBI report that OBAMA asked for before January 20th----
So, you go with that professor-----
But, I'm going with the fact that the FBI has "confirmed" that there was Russian involvement & interference in our 2016 Presidential election----

 

You do realize that the so-called "russian hacking" that supposedly "interfered in the election", was based on the wikileaks documents obtained from the things the DNC was doing right?

Basically the "russian interference" is that they exposed the DNC. You do get that right?

 

When Hillary was expected to win, CNN headline on Oct 16, 2016 NO, THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAN'T BE HACKED

After Trump won, CNN headline on Dec 10, 2016 WHERE'S THE OUTRAGE OVER RUSSIA'S HACK OF THE US ELECTION?

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5vq7vw/cnn_no_the_presidential_election_cant_be_hacked/

 

Lets see, if true then almost 1 out of every 100 votes cast would be by an illegal from California alone. Holy god you can't make up how gullible some trumpists are.

 

So, you are admitting that it is OK for a foreign government to interfere, right?
You do know that hacking someones e-mails are "Illegal",right?
And how do we know if those illegally hacked e-mails were not altered,mmmm?
And finally, I did not have any desire to read the thousands of illegally hacked e-mails,perhaps like you did---I was busy doing the hard work it takes to campaign the legal way----

 

Just more deflection.

This thread ISN'T about the Dems.

But, since I understand that the only talking points the the misinformed, pro-Trump Fever Swamp has is deflection tactics ("But Obama/But Clinton/Fake News")--I will charitably give you a pass.

It isn't your fault that you are incapable of defending Trump (and hilarious BS Fever Swamp theories about "illegal voting") without deflection.

When you can defend the claim in the OP on it's OWN merits (without deflection to Obama, etc.), let me know.

Thanking you in advance.

 

Well,number 1-you don't have to use all caps--
#2--There is now evidence that shows the election data programs DRE'S can be hacked ( FBI report January 20,2016)-Well, according to your date CNN did not have this information, perhaps they believed that our election data "could" not be hacked at the time of their reporting!
I don't watch CNN,so I don't know the context in which you are arguing or I don't know if they have since had conversations about their claims---
But, I do know that a foreighn government interferred with the sovereignty of our election process & that is not acceptable-----Do you not agree with me on that?

 

We don't know that it was a foreign government. Wikileaks has been adamant that they did not obtain the information from any "government source".

Let's touch on wikileaks. That organization has cut both ways in revealing information, and while there are certainly moral, ethical, and legal ramifications with how the information was acquired.....you can't deny that what it has revealed is even scarier.

To me, a government that seeks to spy and control it's citizens and keep secrets from them is a far worse threat than those who seek to reveal it.

After all, look at what Snowden revealed. Are you comfortable with a government that does those things? After all, while the information was acquired illegally, what the government was DOING was ALSO illegal.

We need these sources to reveal this information, to blow the whistle on government corruption.

I'll also note that nothing Wikileaks has ever released has been questioned as to authenticity. Wikileaks is not "fake news" no matter how much someone may want to disbelieve it.

This is of course why the DNC didn't try to refute the information that was released, but immediately tried to turn the narrative into "outside interference".

Personally, I'm glad that the slimy, underhanded and illegal nature of what the DNC was doing was exposed. And yes, I would say the same thing if it was the RNC.

The government isn't two separate sports teams to me. When the government is working against us instead of for us, they need to be exposed as a far more dangerous threat.

What the DNC did was disgusting. THESE were the people trying to rig the election, along with the media.

How and who revealed that information is far less important than what our own government is doing to us.

The extent of the "outside interference" was, after all, simply revealing THE TRUTH.

 

Hillary lost because California doesn't have 100 electoral votes to give her. The vast majority of the 3 million popular votes in her favor were cast by Californians, legal or not, those votes don't come with "bonus electoral" votes.

 

Almost all people? Like whom?

 

Does it surprise you that a Trump supporter who still characterizes Clinton as a "serial liar" after all the lies that we have seen from Trump, would post that?

It shouldn't

 

Warnings about DRE's were available since at 2006. So much for your excuse for CNN.
http://www.salon.com/2011/09/27/votinghack/

Define what you mean by interference in our election. Do foreign leaders expressing fear that Trump might get elected count?

I don't agree that proof has been provided that a foreign government hacked our elections.

If proof is provided the a foreign government was able to hack the DNC computers? That's the DNC's problem.

 

I don't think foreigners had much if any influence on the election outcome. I think the outcome was determined by those who detested both candidates and refused to vote for either major party candidate. Either by staying home or voting third party. We know 8 million voters voted for third party candidates even though they knew the one they voted for didn't have a snowballs chance in Hades of winning. We don't know how many more stayed home and didn't vote refusing to make the choice between Trump and Clinton. We also know Trump won those who detested both candidates and decided to vote for one of the candidates they detested the least. Trump won the detested both candidates vote 50-39 over Clinton. Why is this important, those who detested both candidates made up 25% according to the exit polls of the total votes casts. The hold your nose voters determined this election. Not Clinton supporters or Trump supporters.

What I can't figure out, is why a political party would go ahead and nominate someone under FBI investigation? Any other year and probably with any other candidate would have been dropped like a hot potato. Not last year though. I think this is one question historians will be scratching their heads over for a very long time.

 

That might be so, but until this election nobody questioned the ease in which the voting data programs could be breached & the FBI confirming that in fact there was a data breach--Hey, all this is outlined in the FBI report-you can go get,I have provided it on many of the posts in this forum, but,if you don't read it-you remain ignorant---
I'm not making excuses for CNN,I explained--
Are you not following the news,it has been confirmed by the FBI that there was Russian interferance in the 2016 Preseidential election----again the FBI report
Ok,so then, you are willing to look past that a foreign government interfered & influenced our election process as long as it wasn't against "your" guy ?. Well, then if you allow it to go unchallenged, what happens if there is a next time, but it does not "benefit" your guy? I know this is a hypothetical & somewhat of a straw-man-----BUT------just saying----