[The Hill] State officials from Virginia, California and Kentucky said Thursday that they will refuse a request for voter roll data from President Trump's commission on election integrity.
Earlier Thursday, it was reported that the commission sent letters to all 50 states asking for voters' names, birthdays, the last four digits of their Social Security numbers and their voting history dating back to 2006.
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) said in a statement that he has "no intention" of fulfilling the request, defending the fairness of his state's elections. He also blasted the commission in his statement, saying it was based on the "false notion" of widespread voter fraud in the November presidential election.
"At best this commission was set up as a pretext to validate Donald Trump’s alternative election facts, and at worst is a tool to commit large-scale voter suppression," McAuliffe stated.
California Secretary of State Alex Padilla (D) also responded to the request, saying "I will not provide sensitive voter information to a commission that has already inaccurately passed judgment that millions of Californians voted illegally" in the last election.
"California’s participation would only serve to legitimize the false and already debunked claims of massive voter fraud made by the President, Vice President, and [Kansas Secretary of State Kris] Kobach," Padilla stated.
#7
All are Democrats who are refusing to turn over voter roll data. Are they are afraid revealing Dem voter corruption? These are the same people who scream so loudly about voter ID requirements and cleaning the rolls of dead people and illegal voters.
#8
JohnQC, actually the governor of Kentucky is a Republican.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
06/30/2017 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I just read to the Governor's of Connecticut and Virginia comments to the effect that voter fraud is a fantasy, and Trump is just trying to put up a smokescreen for his comment, and that the Kansas Secretary of State is an architect of voter fraud in his state. This is the first serious nationwide attempt to confirm or deny voter fraud, and coincidently, illegal alien voting. The resistance seems to be either based on protecting voter identity from the federal government, or pure politics, either a laughable contention. I suspect that the truth in California for example, will be massive fraud and illegal voting, and the perpetrators will be found to be overwhelmingly from one political party, .....not mine!
#11
Having said that, I don't think they'll find much proof in California since nobody checked voters vs voter rolls at the election station, so there is really no reason why you would need to cook the books at all.
#12
Later in the evening, Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes (D) said she also wouldn't offer up the information requested by the panel.
Rambler of Virginia. You are correct, the current governor of Kentucky is Matt Bevin, a Pub. The Secretary of State is Alsion Lundergan Grimes (D) according to the article.
#13
Last November was a Federal election. Guess what kiddos, it becomes subject to federal investigation. Read - obstruction. If we could get a real DoJ back, you could count on it.
[WashingtonTimes] Homeland Security Secretary John F. Kelly said Thursday that members of Congress have tried to "threaten" him over his department’s stepped up enforcement of the immigration laws they wrote, and called for even stiffer laws to punish sanctuary cities and repeat-illegal immigrants.
Mr. Kelly said he was "offended" by those lawmakers -- who he didn’t name -- who he said "often threaten me and my officers" when they try to enforce laws that call for the deportation of illegal immigrants.
It’s the latest blunt criticism from the retired Marine general, who has previously told members of Congress to "shut up" rather than criticize him over the laws they wrote.
He appeared Thursday on Capitol Hill with Speaker Paul D. Ryan and other Republicans, hours before the House was slated to vote on two new crackdown laws.
One would increase penalties on illegal immigrants who have been deported yet snuck back into the U.S. and later committed other crimes. That bill is named Kate’s law, after Kathryn Steinle, the woman killed by an illegal immigrant two years ago while walking the San Francisco waterfront with her father.
The other new bill would punish so-called sanctuary cities that refuse to let authorities cooperate with federal immigration officers trying to deport illegal immigrants.
[Forbes] But a cursory look at the CBO's own data raises serious questions about its headline conclusion and should make many in Congress ask CBO some tough questions.
CBO's projected Medicaid losses have their own problems. For example, 5 million are projected to "lose" Medicaid expansion coverage in states that never expanded Medicaid in the first place. Another 7 million are projected to "lose" Medicaid coverage because the individual mandate goes away, even though the individual mandate does not apply to almost all of those currently on or eligible for Medicaid.
But CBO's projections for the individual market are perhaps the most bizarre. According to the CBO, roughly 19 million Americans are expected to buy insurance in the individual market in 2018 if the BCRA becomes law.
CBO states that BCRA is responsible for a 7 million person reduction from what would happen under current law (the Affordable Care Act), based on CBO's 2016 baseline estimates.
The only trouble? CBO updated its baseline estimates in January 2017 to account for how much lower the actual Obamacare exchange enrollment has been, much lower than it previously anticipated as recently as last year.
#1
The CBO says "5 million are projected to "lose" Medicaid expansion coverage in states that never expanded The CBO says Medicaid in the first place. Another 7 million are projected to "lose" Medicaid coverage because the individual mandate goes away, even though the individual mandate does not apply to almost all of those currently on or eligible for Medicaid."
I thought SCOTUS decided to scrap the individual mandate for the ACA. It was never a part of Medicaid as stated above.
[FoxNews] When a University of Washington study came out this week showing Seattle's minimum wage has cost 5,000 jobs and is hurting low income workers, city leaders attacked the messenger –- a team of respected economists at Washington's premiere public university.
The researchers, led by Jacob Vigdor, were hired by the city in 2014 to study the effects of Seattle's $15 wage experiment. The contract called for five years of research. City officials stopped funding the UW team when they didn't like the results.
"The moment we saw it was based on flawed methodology and was going to be unreliable, the Vigdor study no longer speaks for City Hall," said Seattle City Councilwoman Kshama Sawant. "Keep doing it over and over until we get the results we like!"
Posted by: Seeking cure for ignorance ||
06/30/2017 00:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
Repeated studies are so last millennium. Get yourself a computer model and you can have whatever result you want right from the start, just like the climate change boys.
#6
Some twenty years ago an number of grocery chains in south Texas got together and funded a university study on roadside stands that sell raw shrimp, mostly panel truck on the side of the highway kind of things. The study was going to be the setup for starting a bill to make it illegal to sell that way.
Unfortunately, the study found that roadside stands generally had better quality, fresher, and cheaper product than the stores. Basically right off the boat. Which was what it was.
Ooops.
Posted by: ed in texas ||
06/30/2017 10:25 Comments ||
Top||
[Daily Caller] WASHINGTON -- Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley fired off a letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Wednesday questioning numerous probes into acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and asking whether investigators have found any political conflicts from these inquiries.
In his letter to Rosenstein, Grassley reminded him that he already asked about McCabe’s apparent conflict of interests due to his close relationship with Democratic Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe, among other issues, and then pointed out that McCabe appears to be the focus of three separate pending investigations.
"First, the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General is examining his failure to recuse himself from the Clinton investigation due to his political relationship with McAuliffe. Second, the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) is investigating allegations that he violated the Hatch Act by engaging in political campaign activities," Grassley wrote.
"Third, he is also reportedly the subject of a pending Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint by a female FBI agent for sex discrimination, who alleges she was targeted for retaliation because of her complaint," he added.
Chairman Grassley cited a new report by Circa News that says former Trump National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was the subject of retaliation from the FBI for supporting the female FBI agent through an official letter during the case.
#1
Rosenstein, McCabe, Comey, and Mueller are all conflicted and compromised. They need to all step away or be excluded; otherwise there will always be the taint of a witch hunt.
#4
The apparatchiks hired under the Clinton Administration have had enough time and seniority to burrow their way to the top. The previous cohort from the Cold War Era at least had an external foe to encourage them to display some impartiality.
#5
That remark by g(r)omgoru kinda remined me of the following:
An engineer dies . . . and goes to Hell. Dissatisfied with the level of comfort, he starts designing and building improvements. After a while, Hell has air conditioning, flush toilets and escalators.
The engineer is a pretty popular guy.
One day God calls and asks Satan, "So, how's it going down there?"
Satan says, "Hey things are going great. We've got air conditioning and flush toilets and escalators, and there's no telling what this engineer is going to come up with next."
God is horrified. "What? You've got an engineer? That's a mistake - he should never have gone down there! You know all engineers go to Heaven. Send him up here! "
Satan says, "No way. I like having an engineer on staff. I'm keeping him."
God says, "Send him back up here or I'll sue."
"Yeah, right," Satan laughs, "and where are you going to get a lawyer?"
[Breitbart] Thursday on a Facebook live event on the Democratic Party Facebook page, former White House senior advisor to President Barack Obama Valerie Jarrett said the legislative process to pass the Affordable Care Act in 2010 was "very transparent."
Jarrett said, "I mean we had hundreds of meetings. We made hundreds of amendments. It was all very transparent. The President had a great meeting where we invited in the Republicans for an open press session to answer all of their questions. It was a collaborative effort. The intent was to make it bipartisan, and the intent was to be open and honest with the American people. Our scoring was put out for everybody to see because we wanted people to understand before the decision was made what was at stake and what we were trying to accomplish."
"Right now, everyone was scurrying around this week to read a very long and complicated bill, and the question you have to say was, ’If they’re proud of it, why were they hiding it behind closed doors?'" she continued. "And my real hot button is, why were 13 men in a room deciding about health care that impacts my life? You have 21 women in the Senate. They couldn’t have picked one of those women to be there?"
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/30/2017 7:57 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"If you like your insurance, you can keep your insurance. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor." BHO. STFU and accept Obamacare, we won. We don't need no stinking Pub input either was the message when this turkey was forced upon us.
#4
Jarrett said, "I mean we had hundreds of meetings. We made hundreds of amendments.
And the H.R. 3962 was thousands of pages in length but that didn't matter, it still failed. Aside from that, whe is it necessary that we hear from Valerie Jarrett on foking anything ?
#5
why is it necessary that we hear from Valerie Jarrett on foking anything
Because they're in deep sh*t and she was the brains behind it. Everyone else is bailing on her.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
06/30/2017 10:12 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I seem to remember having less than three days to read and interpret this monstrosity before it was voted on. I seem to remember lots of backroom deals to buy various Dems' votes, some in the hundreds of millions of dollars. I seem to remember Obumhole supposedly "fooling" a bunch of Right-to-Life Dems about the abortion aspects of the bill.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[FoxNews] When a University of Washington study came out this week showing Seattle's minimum wage has cost 5,000 jobs and is hurting low income workers, city leaders attacked the messenger –- a team of respected economists at Washington's premiere public university.
