WorthyNews: Immigration agency won't commit to giving noncitizen data to voter fraud commission

[Running Gator]

6 minutes ago, PageofGrace said:

Yes, you know not of what you speak. 

I know exactly what I speak of.  

My agency was sued by the IRS to force us to turn over information.  It went in front of a Fed Judge who ruled in our favor, saying basically that our need to ensure confidentiality was took precedent over the IRS's need to go after someone for tax evasion. 

Do you work for the Fed Govt?  Do you have any experience at all in this area? 

Quote

This will be a process. But the president will prevail if he presses. 

Very doubtful, the constitution gives control of the election to the states, the President has no leg to stand on in this area. 

[PageofGrace]

12 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

I know exactly what I speak of.  

My agency was sued by the IRS to force us to turn over information.  It went in front of a Fed Judge who ruled in our favor, saying basically that our need to ensure confidentiality was took precedent over the IRS's need to go after someone for tax evasion. 

Do you work for the Fed Govt?  Do you have any experience at all in this area? 

Very doubtful, the constitution gives control of the election to the states, the President has no leg to stand on in this area. 

That's just lovely of you to think so. Have a great evening. 

[Steve_S]

12 minutes ago, Running Gator said:

Very doubtful, the constitution gives control of the election to the states, the President has no leg to stand on in this area. 

I don't think anybody really is under any other illusion as far as that goes, at least, not the lawyers the executive branch employs, of which there are many. There are political benefits to this, though, and i would not be surprised if this were purely political, though not to get at voter lists. Basically, he can claim there is fraud and democrats in x states that don't turn over records are purposely protecting it, without having to prove it. It's pretty elegant politically. Any time he claims voter fraud going forward he can point to terry mccauliffe, et. al. as to why the fraud is perpetuated. The only response that they can really give is there's no fraud, trust us. True or not, he can then lambast them for not being open.

[Running Gator]

11 minutes ago, Steve_S said:

I don't think anybody really is under any other illusion as far as that goes, at least, not the lawyers the executive branch employs, of which there are many. There are political benefits to this, though, and i would not be surprised if this were purely political, though not to get at voter lists. Basically, he can claim there is fraud and democrats in x states that don't turn over records are purposely protecting it, without having to prove it. It's pretty elegant politically. Any time he claims voter fraud going forward he can point to terry mccauliffe, et. al. as to why the fraud is perpetuated. The only response that they can really give is there's no fraud, trust us. True or not, he can then lambast them for not being open.

If there were any Repubs handing over data that might be a better tactic, but at last count 44 states have said no.  

The Co-Chair of the commission said no to himself even.   

So, while that might have been the plan, I would say that it has already failed. 

[PageofGrace]

Well, at least one after the other stopped it's obvious pattern after the obvious was made public.  
 

[Steve_S]

4 hours ago, Running Gator said:

If there were any Repubs handing over data that might be a better tactic, but at last count 44 states have said no.  

The Co-Chair of the commission said no to himself even.   

So, while that might have been the plan, I would say that it has already failed. 

He doesn't need it to win the states he already has. He would be using it to make a narrow case to a narrow spectrum of voters in a handful of states. 

[Running Gator]

8 hours ago, Steve_S said:

He doesn't need it to win the states he already has. He would be using it to make a narrow case to a narrow spectrum of voters in a handful of states. 

Unless that narrow spectrum of voters in a handful of states are the "low/no information" voter it seems such an easy case to refute by the other side.  If fact I can just as easily see it being turned around and being used to show Trump as a power grabbing tyrant making demands of the states that go against the constitution and that even his most faithful supporters denied.   Throw in that the person making the demands did not even comply with them.  Seems that would be more effective than the "what are the hiding" and much harder for the Trump camp to counter.