US Politics

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Co'tor Shas**

Frazzled wrote:
Meanwhile back at the Hall of Injustice.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-does-it-take-to-convict-a-police-officer-for-killing-an-unarmed-black-man/2016/12/08/f27980ac-bd6b-11e6-91ee-1adddfe36cbe_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.4eb8fb894bdd

I really do love America, but seriously, feth America. If we can't convict someone who killed an unarmed man who was not attacking ON TAPE and then PLANTED EVIDENCE ON HIM we might as well not prosecute them.

**reds8n**

..and the media falls in line.....

**Vash108**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Meanwhile back at the Hall of Injustice.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/what-does-it-take-to-convict-a-police-officer-for-killing-an-unarmed-black-man/2016/12/08/f27980ac-bd6b-11e6-91ee-1adddfe36cbe_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.4eb8fb894bdd

I really do love America, but seriously, feth America. If we can't convict someone who killed an unarmed man who was not attacking ON TAPE and then PLANTED EVIDENCE ON HIM we might as well not prosecute them.

Sounds like business as usual.

**Frazzled**

On the positive the prosecutor already said there will be a retrial. Mistrials do happen.

I always instructed the kids-to say they do not consent but do not resist (or fight and then run away in this circumstance).

**jreilly89**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
People do change, you know.
Sessions is better judged by what he's done in the last ten years, n not something he did thirty years ago.

Okay, in the last 10 years, he's done everything in power to stop LGBTQ rights, thinks Marijuana is a dangerous drug, and thinks climate change is a hoax. Happy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions#Social_issues

**A Town Called Malus**

jreilly89 wrote:
Tannhauser42 wrote:
People do change, you know.
Sessions is better judged by what he's done in the last ten years, n not something he did thirty years ago.

Okay, in the last 10 years, he's done everything in power to stop LGBTQ rights, thinks Marijuana is a dangerous drug, and thinks climate change is a hoax. Happy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions#Social_issues

In 2005 he opposed legislation put forward by McCain which would prohibit the US military from using torture. He also voted against a bill which prohibited anybody in US custody from being subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

He's also a big fan of civil forfeiture laws.

**oldravenman3025**

BigWaaagh wrote:

Ah, those sacred "sovereign borders". Cue the patriotic music.

That's right. They are "sacred" (as you sarcastically call them) because the exist. And for a reason.

Here's a newsflash for you, son. This isn't Star Trek or some other science fiction universe. This is the real world. In the real world, we are still a divided species. Remember that.

Firstly, the biggest problem with illegal immigrants is coming from those flying into the country LEGALLY and overstaying their visas, not swarming across the Rio Grande as you so ridiculously allude to with the whole "borders are being violated" nonsense.

Bull

. The problem with your BS assertion here is that it's not grounded in facts. The FACT is that illegal immigration (via border violation) can only be estimated, based on THOSE ACTUALLY CAUGHT BY DHS (which averages at only 33% of border violations). In fiscal year 2015 (to name a recent example), there was a little over 527,000 overstays of visas. The deal here is that not all of that 527,000+ stayed or deliberately overstayed. Late departures and mistakes are counted among that number. The Department of Homeland Security recorded, in the same fiscal year, 337,117 illegals caught while trying to cross the border. With an estimate of two successful crossing per one caught,that comes out to 674,000 in FY2015. That's not counting the possible numbers smuggled in by "coyotes" and drug mules (estimates on these vary widely). And when they come, they tend to stay (unless they are involved in some sort of criminal enterprise), unlike a large portion of those overstaying their visas (because they have a paper trail and usually get caught and deported, if it's a case of deliberate overstay). There have been estimates in the past from think tanks and university studies that exceed the DHS numbers on yearly violations of the southern border.

The fact is that no matter the number of border violations, any is too goddamned much. ESPECIALLY since, unlike those who overstay their visas, are UNDOCUMENTED. And that is serious

business. And there is more of it every year than long term visa overstays that slip through the cracks.

Your gymnastic jump to trying to tie your version of the current "forged narrative" to smart immigration policy is so off the mark as to be fiction.

That's rich, brah. Keep thinking that. Whatever gets you through the night.

“America is expelling illegal immigrants at nine times the rate of 20 years ago; nearly 2m so far under Barack Obama, easily outpacing any previous president,” the Economist wrote in February 2014. “Border patrol agents no longer just patrol the border; they scour the country for illegals to eject. The deportation machine costs more than all other areas of federal criminal law-enforcement combined.”

Border Patrol agents have always assisted the INS, DEA, BATF, and local law enforcement in rounding up illegals that slip across the border, and illegals here for criminal reasons (drug and gun smuggling). Whoever wrote this is blowing smoke out their ass. It's not something new or recent. And the "deportation machine" costs so damned much because it's a "revolving door". Illegals that get deported are usually back in the United States, on average, within a period between six months and a year. When you have an unsecured border with the same ones (in addition to the new blood) crossing on a regular basis, then it's going to take more money, manpower, and resources. But that's no damned excuse for just letting illegals stay or offering amnesty to those who violate our laws and sovereign borders.

"Critics may declare President Obama soft on immigration but according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data the Department of Homeland Security deported 414,481 people in fiscal year 2014, down from 438,421 the year before. Each year of the Obama administration has seen more deportations than any preceding president; the pre-Obama high of 358,886 removals in FY2008 came during President George W. Bush’s last full fiscal year in office."

Obama hasn't been any better or any worse than any previous administration. The problem is what the Federal Government, in particular CONGRESS and the agencies responsible, is (or is not) doing to better secure the border. Those that criticize Obama are blowing smoke. All administrations going back decades deserve some of the blame equally, in addition to other branches/agencies besides the DHS and Executive.

And these numbers are irrelevant. The numbers of deportations, like the numbers of border crossings, will vary based on primarily economic, political, and domestic factors in both the United States and Mexico. It's been higher in some fiscal years than in others. It doesn't prove that the current President is either soft or hard on immigration violations.

There's the reality of the situation. Not the misinformed, fear-addled pablum about hordes of unchecked illegals overrunning our nation, taking away our jobs, raping our women nonsense championed by our POTUS elect and his ilk. Absurdity in extremis!

Ridiculous hyperbole on your part right here, and a blatant play of the nonsensical "Trump Card". I can say that I AM informed about this, based on facts, stats from various sources, personal experience dealing with migrant workers and illegals, dealing with immigration officials in my time as an LEO/Corrections Officer, and history. I'm not the one attempting to deflect here using the standard BS leftist/neocon/controlled Old Media comebacks and nonsense you are spouting out in this statement (none of which I mentioned in my previous post). That's the REAL absurdity here.

The hard, sad fact of the matter is that the numbers don't

ing lie. The number that successfully cross the border illegally exceed the numbers overstaying visas, is a national security risk to the United States of America, is a major law enforcement/public safety issue, a clear cut and inexcusable violation of our laws and sovereignty, a human rights issue (people smuggling/human trafficking), and a disservice to those who come here LEGALLY for a better life. Just because you want it to be otherwise doesn't make it so. Despite your username, you're not an Ork with the gestault powers of the Warp. And those numbers are too goddamned high, and constitute a "horde" as far as I'm concerned.

My stance, pure and simple, is secure the melon-fething border and encourage people to come here LEGALLY. Contrary to your hysterical response, I do support immigration. But only if it's done LEGALLY and in full COMPLIANCE OF OUR LAWS. End. Of.

. Story.

**Tannhauser42**

jreilly89 wrote:
Tannhauser42 wrote:
People do change, you know.
Sessions is better judged by what he's done in the last ten years, n not something he did thirty years ago.

Okay, in the last 10 years, he's done everything in power to stop LGBTQ rights, thinks Marijuana is a dangerous drug, and thinks climate change is a hoax. Happy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions#Social_issues

There is no need to snap at me. I'm against Sessions as AG for much the same reasons, which is exactly why I said what I said: Judge him by his recent and current actions, not something he did when half the people on Dakka were still watching Sesame Street.

**jreilly89**

Tannhauser42 wrote:
jreilly89 wrote:
Tannhauser42 wrote:
People do change, you know.
Sessions is better judged by what he's done in the last ten years, n not something he did thirty years ago.

Okay, in the last 10 years, he's done everything in power to stop LGBTQ rights, thinks Marijuana is a dangerous drug, and thinks climate change is a hoax. Happy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessions#Social_issues

There is no need to snap at me. I'm against Sessions as AG for much the same reasons, which is exactly why I said what I said: Judge him by his recent and current actions, not something he did when half the people on Dakka were still watching Sesame Street.

Not trying to snap at you, merely trying to point out he's done a lot of gakky things in the past 10 years. Besides, if he did something 30 years ago and never apologized for it, isn't it worth bringing up?

**Ensis Ferrae**

reds8n wrote:

..and the media falls in line.....

I thought it was well established that WSJ had a bit of a right-wing bias... or was that NYT?

**BigWaaagh**

oldravenman3025 wrote:
BigWaaagh wrote:

Ah, those sacred "sovereign borders". Cue the patriotic music.

That's right. They are "sacred" (as you sarcastically call them) because the exist. And for a reason.

Here's a newsflash for you, son. This isn't Star Trek or some other science fiction universe. This is the real world. In the real world, we are still a divided species. Remember that.

Firstly, the biggest problem with illegal immigrants is coming from those flying into the country LEGALLY and overstaying their visas, not swarming across the Rio Grande as you so ridiculously allude to with the whole "borders are being violated" nonsense.

Bull . The problem with your BS assertion here is that it's not grounded in facts. The FACT is that illegal immigration (via border violation) can only be estimated, based on THOSE ACTUALLY CAUGHT BY DHS (which averages at only 33% of border violations). In fiscal year 2015 (to name a recent example), there was a little over 527,000 overstays of visas. The deal here is that not all of that 527,000+ stayed or deliberately overstayed. Late departures and mistakes are counted among that number. The Department of Homeland Security recorded, in the same fiscal year, 337,117 illegals caught while trying to cross the border. With an estimate of two successful crossing per one caught,that comes out to 674,000 in FY2015. That's not counting the possible numbers smuggled in by "coyotes" and drug mules (estimates on these vary widely). And when they come, they tend to stay (unless they are involved in some sort of criminal enterprise), unlike a large portion of those overstaying their visas (because they have a paper trail and usually get caught and deported, if it's a case of deliberate overstay). There have been estimates in the past from think tanks and university studies that exceed the DHS numbers on yearly violations of the southern border.

The fact is that no matter the number of border violations, any is too goddamned much. ESPECIALLY since, unlike those who overstay their visas, are UNDOCUMENTED. And that is serious business. And there is more of it every year than long term visa overstays that slip through the cracks.

Your gymnastic jump to trying to tie your version of the current "forged narrative" to smart immigration policy is so off the mark as to be fiction.

That's rich, brah. Keep thinking that. Whatever gets you through the night.

“America is expelling illegal immigrants at nine times the rate of 20 years ago; nearly 2m so far under Barack Obama, easily outpacing any previous president,” the Economist wrote in February 2014. “Border patrol agents no longer just patrol the border; they scour the country for illegals to eject. The deportation machine costs more than all other areas of federal criminal law-enforcement combined.”

Border Patrol agents have always assisted the INS, DEA, BATF, and local law enforcement in rounding up illegals that slip across the border, and illegals here for criminal reasons (drug and gun smuggling). And the "deportation machine" costs so damned much because it's a "revolving door". Illegals that get deported are usually back in the United States, on average, within a period between six months and a year. When you have an unsecured border with the same ones (in addition to the new blood) crossing on a regular basis, then it's going to take more money, manpower, and resources. But that's no damned excuse for just letting illegals stay or offering amnesty to those who violate our laws and sovereign borders.

"Critics may declare President Obama soft on immigration but according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data the Department of Homeland Security deported 414,481 people in fiscal year 2014, down from 438,421 the year before. Each year of the Obama administration has seen more deportations than any preceding president; the pre-Obama high of 358,886 removals in FY2008 came during President George W. Bush’s last full fiscal year in office."

Obama hasn't been any better or any worse than any previous administration. The problem is what the Federal Government, in particular CONGRESS and the agencies responsible, is (or is not) doing to better secure the border. Those that criticize Obama are blowing smoke. All administrations going back decades deserve some of the blame equally, in addition to other branches/agencies besides the DHS and Executive.

And these numbers are irrelevant. The numbers of deportations, like the numbers of border crossings, will vary based on primarily economic, political, and domestic factors in both the United States and Mexico. It's been higher in some fiscal years than in others. It doesn't prove that the current President is either soft or hard on immigration violations.

There's the reality of the situation. Not the misinformed, fear-addled pablum about hordes of unchecked illegals overrunning our nation, taking away our jobs, raping our women nonsense championed by our POTUS elect and his ilk. Absurdity in extremis!

Ridiculous hyperbole on your part right here, and a blatant play of the nonsensical "Trump Card". I can say that I AM informed about this, based on facts, stats from various sources, personal experience dealing with migrant workers and illegals, dealing with immigration officials in my time as an LEO/Corrections Officer, and history. The number that successfully cross the border illegally exceed the numbers overstaying visasThat's the REAL absurdity here.

The hard, sad fact of the matter is that the numbers don't ing lie. The number that successfully cross the border illegally exceed the numbers overstaying visas, is a national security risk to the United States of America, is a major law enforcement/public safety issue, a clear cut and inexcusable violation of our laws and sovereignty, a human rights issue (people smuggling/human trafficking), and a disservice to those who come here LEGALLY for a better life. Just because you want it to be otherwise doesn't make it so. Despite your username, you're not an Ork with the gestault powers of the Warp. And those numbers are too goddamned high, and constitute a "horde" as far as I'm concerned.

My stance, pure and simple, is secure the melon-fething border and encourage people to come here LEGALLY. Contrary to your hysterical response, I do support immigration. But only if it's done LEGALLY and in full COMPLIANCE OF OUR LAWS. End. Of. . Story.

Way to keep it civil and adult. All that profanity and I'm "hysterical"? Maybe a dictionary for Christmas is in the cards for you.

Rant addressed, in order:

"We're a divided species." -Yes, let's stay tribal and xenophobic because that's always been the recipe for world peace.

"The FACT is that illegal immigration (via border violation) can only be estimated." -So you readily admit that you can't actually show the numbers, but you base your entire argument on how this, far and away, is the means by which we're supposedly being overrun by those scary illegal immigrants?! Not the, according to you, "BS" actual empirical numbers provided by various agencies and independent reports. I'll cite another bit of empirical "BS" for you to tilt against: 2013 Pew Report - "The most interesting part of the report is the news that our illegal immigrant population is now more diverse — Mexicans now make up just 52 percent of that group, compared to 57 percent in 2007 — and is more often arriving legally and overstaying temporary visas than sneaking across the border." Or maybe this little fact from The Hoover Institute: "The overall rate of immigration into the United States stands at about 3.1 immigrants per 1,000 per year, trending slightly downward from 2000 onward.
More concretely, the net rate of immigration from Mexico, which was very high, totaling 600,000 in the boom years of 2006-2007, was sharply negative in the recession years of 2012-2013, at minus 600,000, and roughly neutral since that time. The same picture has applied globally since 2009, with net immigration and outflow of illegal aliens about constant, with between 300,000 and 400,000 in each group per year."
You know the concept of "BS" right? It's trying to make a point without corroborating facts? Yeah...

"Whoever wrote this is blowing smoke out their ass. It's not something new or recent." -It's 2014 statistics, so one year old as 2016 isn't in the books yet and it was presented in 'The Economist', which is a globally respected periodical on political and economic issues. But it doesn't fit with your unchecked invasion of the aliens storyline, so, sure, disregard it.

"Obama hasn't been any better or any worse than any previous administration." -Even when presented with actual ICE numbers showing that he has been not only better at addressing and deporting illegal aliens THAN ANY OTHER PRESIDENT, but has been so by a very dramatic margin. But, again, it doesn't fit the fantastical "sky is falling" narrative you espouse. Darned FACTS getting in the way.

"The number that successfully cross the border illegally exceed the numbers overstaying visas." -Once again arguing something as fact that you admit "can only be estimated". Do you get the whole idea of presenting a position and supporting with empirical evidence and not profanity as gravitas?

"The hard, sad fact of the matter is that the numbers don't

ing lie." -No, no they don't. Now if you could attempt to present your position with more of those on your side instead of the condescension and profanity you've thrown at this as a, I guess, desperate means to support your position, then maybe there'd be something to your statements. As it is, the rant just comes off as a bit desperate.

**Mitochondria**

Waggh,

Do you live in a border state?

**BigWaaagh**

Mitochondria wrote:
Waggh,

Do you live in a border state?

I live in a city that has the second largest population of Mexican-born immigrants outside of LA. Next.

**gorgon**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
reds8n wrote:

..and the media falls in line.....

I thought it was well established that WSJ had a bit of a right-wing bias... or was that NYT?

The WSJ most certainly leans right.

**Stevefamine**

42 Days until Donald Trump takes office

**whembly**

tneva82 wrote:
feeder wrote:
Considering how strongly you were #NeverTrump before the election, now that it's done you've jumped pretty hard on the ol' party bandwagon, eh?

He was #nevertrump just for show. Personal PR. In reality he was #TrumpForWhiteHouse.

Seems also he still thinks Clinton lost because of deplorable comment when that wasn't case. Lol.

:rolls eye:

Whatever man... I have my reasons.

Clinton lost primarily because she was just a bad candidate all over.

**feeder**

whembly wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
feeder wrote:
Considering how strongly you were #NeverTrump before the election, now that it's done you've jumped pretty hard on the ol' party bandwagon, eh?

He was #nevertrump just for show. Personal PR. In reality he was #TrumpForWhiteHouse.

Nah, I think he is one of those Repub true believers that HRC was trying to win over with her basket of deplorables comment. Too bad it was so stupidly worded that it was easy for the GOP spin machine to turn her words around into an attack on all Repubs. Also, one stupid, easily taken out of context comment isn't going to overcome 25 years of scandal slinging.

Whatever man... I have my reasons.

Clinton lost primarily because she was just a bad candidate all over.

Well, that and the highly motivated deplorables who think Trump is their messiah.

edit: fix quote derp

**hotsauceman1**

whembly 698575 9066066 1f3a4541aff816ba5d6eca832e31b5b9.jp wrote:
Hope they ain't smokers or alcohol drinkers...

Or Plane/train riders...

Or, take a loan...

or... a gak, you know the rest.

well, you dont need a drivers license to get those, just a state issued ID

**whembly**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
whembly 698575 9066066 1f3a4541aff816ba5d6eca832e31b5b9.jp wrote:
Hope they ain't smokers or alcohol drinkers...

Or Plane/train riders...

Or, take a loan...

or... a gak, you know the rest.

well, you dont need a drivers license to get those, just a state issued ID

Of course!

**reds8n**

https://www.thenation.com/article/trumps-lies-about-voter-fraud-are-already-leading-to-new-gop-voter-suppression-efforts/

Less than a month after Donald Trump unexpectedly carried Michigan by 10,000 votes, Republicans in the state legislature are already pushing to make it harder to vote. The presidential recount hasn’t even finished yet and Michigan Republicans are trying to pass a strict voter-ID law through the lame-duck legislative session before the end of this year.

Under current Michigan law, a voter who does not present photo ID at the polls can sign an affidavit confirming their identify, under penalty of perjury, and cast a regular ballot. Under the new bill, which passed the House Elections Commission on a 5-3 party-line vote on December 1, voters without strict ID would have to cast a provisional ballot and then return to their local clerk’s office within 10 days of the election with photo ID to have their votes counted.

This change to Michigan’s election laws could make a big difference in future elections: 18,339 people without strict photo ID used the affidavit option to vote in 2016—8,000 votes greater than Trump’s margin of victory. One-third of the affidavits came from Detroit, where Hillary Clinton won 67 percent of the vote in Wayne County.

Already, Trump’s discredited lie that “millions” voted illegally in 2016 seems to be impacting Republican actions. “A multitude of candidates have raised the concerns about the integrity of elections,” said GOP Representative Lisa Lyons, who sponsored the bill. “We need to respond to those questions. We are going to make sure that we’re protecting you—all voters—and the integrity of the election.”

Like Trump, Lyons presented no evidence of voter impersonation or other types of fraud to justify her bill. She passed the bill in her committee after just two days of testimony last week, when the rest of the state was preoccupied with the recount. The bill included $10 million to pay for the voter-ID law, which sounds like a good thing, but makes it impossible for voters to overturn the law via referendum.

“Donald Trump tweeted that millions had voted illegally and 48 hours later this bill popped up out of nowhere,” says Dan Korobkin, deputy legal director for the Michigan ACLU. “That’s either a giant coincidence or a very concerted effort to disenfranchise people at the state and local level based on lies.”

Despite their stated concern for voter fraud, Michigan Republicans on Friday sued to block a recount of the state’s presidential votes, which would’ve ensured the accuracy of the final count. The brief by Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette criticized Jill Stein because “she cited no evidence of fraud or mistake in the canvass of votes,” even though a similar paucity of fraud hasn’t stopped Republicans from pushing for voter ID.

Michigan election officials urged the House not to pass the measure. “I am about the only clerk who can be here today because of the massive recount we’re preparing for,” said Kent County clerk Mary Hollinrake. “This comes as a large surprise. We have not had time to look at these bills.”

“The effective consequence of this bill is to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of eligible voters in Michigan,” says the ACLU’s Korobkin. “As far as we know, there are virtually no instances of voter impersonation in Michigan. It’s nothing even close to a systematic problem.”

The fact that Michigan Republicans are pushing a strict voter-ID law so soon after the election, despite no evidence of fraud, signals that Republicans will intensify their push to restrict voting rights in the Trump era. On the Sunday talk shows, top Republicans like Mike Pence, Reince Preibus, and Paul Ryan refused to condemn Trump’s lie that millions voted illegally, laying the groundwork for a massive war on voting. “Whether there’s widespread voter fraud or not,” the executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party said recently, “the people believe there is.”

This is happening in other states as well.

In New Hampshire, newly elected GOP Governor Chris Sununu has called for eliminating same-day registration, and Republicans in the legislature want to tighten residency requirements to vote.

In North Carolina, GOP Governor Pat McCrory spread bogus claims of voter fraud before finally conceding to Democrat Roy Cooper, while conservative groups are challenging same-day registration and the GOP legislature is considering packing the state Supreme Court in a special legislative session beginning December 13 to reassert Republican control after Democrats won a 4-3 majority on election night.

In Wisconsin, Republican leaders called for cutting early voting, again, after high early-voting turnout in Democratic cities like Madison and Milwaukee. “We’re probably going to have to look at it again to make sure that everybody in the state has the same chance to vote,” said House Speaker Robin Vos.

In Texas, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has called for reviving the state’s strict voter-ID law, which has repeatedly been struck down as discriminatory by federal courts, listing it as one of his top 10 priorities for the 2017 legislative sessions. “I know we’re going to do photo voter ID again,” he said.

The push to make it harder to vote is especially concerning in Michigan given how the state has already subverted local democracy through the emergency-manager law, which has had disastrous consequences in cities like Flint. Half of African Americans in Michigan live in cities that no longer have local control. When voters overturned the emergency-manager law in 2012 via referendum, Republicans in the legislature took only 13 days to pass a new one.

The state’s attempt to ban straight-ticket voting was blocked in 2016 by federal courts, which found it had “a disproportionate burden on African Americans’ right to vote” and would lead to longer lines in cities like Detroit.

Michigan already has some of the worst voting laws in the country—there’s no early voting or same-day registration, you need an excuse to get an absentee ballot and there are frequently three-to-four hour lines in urban areas like Detroit. Moreover, the process for obtaining a driver’s license or state ID in Michigan can be incredibly complex, as this chart tweeted by Dale Ho of the ACLU shows:

According to the secretary of state’s instructions, “There may be some applicants who simply are not eligible for a driver license or personal identification card because we cannot adequately identify them.” If that applies to IDs for voting, it means the new law will almost certainly prevent eligible voters from casting a ballot.

In 2012, Governor Rick Snyder vetoed bills requiring proof of citizenship and photo ID to get an absentee ballot. With Snyder’s approval ratings plummeting because of Flint, can the governor again do the right thing?

We have those "schrodinger immigrants" as well.

Over here they take all the jobs whilst, simultaneously, laze around all day soaking up benefits.

It's more impressive, IMO, that stateside they can vote and yet not vote at the same time.

"“Whether there’s widespread voter fraud or not,” the executive director of the North Carolina Republican Party said recently, “the people believe there is.”

a reassuring response.

Bet y'all can't wait for the truth about 9/11, the faked moon landings , JFK's assassination and the actual blend of secret spices and herbs to be investigated .

**Frazzled**

Ok this is strange. Georgia's Sec of State alleging that DHS tried to hack into their computers. Er...what?

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/atlanta/secretary-of-state-wants-answers-from-dhs-after-apparent-breach-attempt/474347363?ecmp=wsbtv_social_twitter_sfp

ATLANTA - The Georgia Secretary of State is demanding answers from the Department of Homeland Security after an unsuccessful breach to the department’s firewall.

Secretary of State Brian Kemp talked exclusively with Channel 2 investigative reporter Aaron Diamant on Thursday, saying he was “mad as hell” after what he called a massive cyberattack on the agency's network Nov. 15, traced back to a United States Department of Homeland Security IP address.

"It's outrageous to think about our own federal government is doing this to us," Kemp told Diamant.

TRENDING STORIES:

Police: Suspect in Americus officers' shooting is dead
Family says 11-year-old accidentally killed 14-year-old
Mother, daughter found dead in well in North Carolina

Kemp's office maintains Georgia’s voter registration and elections data, plus corporate and professional license records.

Kemp told Diamant that the network's firewall held up and there was no breech. But after the agency's security vendor sounded the alarm, Kemp fired off a terse letter Thursday to DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson.

"We're demanding answers to some of these questions, you know? Are they doing this to other states? Was it authorized or not? Who ordered this? Why is it being done and why weren't we notified?" Kemp said.

Diamant used Skype to contact former FBI and Department of Defense cybersecurity analyst Willis McDonald on Thursday to get his take on the situation.

We broke the news of cyber attack on GA agency that runs elections. At 6…EXCLUSIVE w/@BrianKempGA about signs @DHSgov launched it @wsbtv pic.twitter.com/nbDmCQ6VWk — Aaron Diamant (@AaronDiamantWSB) December 8, 2016

"It would actually be inconceivable to think that the federal government would start attempting to break into a state agency without any coordination," McDonald told Diamant.

The Roswell-based consultant told Diamant the most-likely scenario is that a hacker spoofed a DHS IP address.

"It's fairly easy. It's fairly common to see something like that happening," McDonald said.

But until DHS responds, Kemp said he is not yet convinced this wasn't a politically motivated attack ordered by DHS leaders or a single rogue staffer.

"We're waiting on answers, you know? Hopefully we'll get them, hopefully they'll be transparent, and they'll be some good answers that we can digest. But right now, we just don't know," Kemp said.

Kemp assured Diamant that the cyberattack, government or otherwise, was not successful.

A DHS representative emailed Diamant a statement saying:

"The Department of Homeland Security has received Secretary Kemp's letter. We are looking into the matter. DHS takes the trust of our public and private sector partners seriously, and we will respond to Secretary Kemp directly."

**whembly**

Good hackers can spoof their IP addresses. Meaning... the target only sees what the hackers want them to see.

I'm willing to bet it's some hacker group, rather than DHS folks, perpetuating this.

**Frazzled**

Or maybe they even rerouted through DHS computers. Scary stuff. Thats why I recommend to all my clients that we invest in canned goods and shotguns.

**feeder**

The DHS spies on all citizens, including state dept officials.

Their outrage is amusing.

**Co'tor Shas**

Why the feth would the DHS hack them anyways?

**Tannhauser42**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
Why the feth would the DHS hack them anyways?

Yeah, isn't that the NSA's job? That's what I remember from Sneakers, anyway.

**Just Tony**

Mitochondria wrote:Waggh,

Do you live in a border state?

You don't even need to live in a boarder state to see it. There are two pork processing plants here in Indiana that deport illegals frequently. I was working in the Shipping area when 50+ were bussed out who all had the same Social Security number. Some of them I saw again at the OTHER plant when I worked there for a bit.

**BaronIveagh**

whembly wrote:
Even mentally deficient hackers can spoof their IP addresses. .

Fixed.

HTTP Tunneling to watch porn at work, anyone?

**Ensis Ferrae**

gorgon wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
reds8n wrote:

..and the media falls in line.....

I thought it was well established that WSJ had a bit of a right-wing bias... or was that NYT?

The WSJ most certainly leans right.

That's what I thought, and was kind of my point.... the two headlines shown in the comment I quoted both had an obvious right-wing "lean" (I mean, at some point, I think they gotta fall over... unless they are Weeples) to them.

**thekingofkings**

Ensis Ferrae wrote:
gorgon wrote:
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
reds8n wrote:

..and the media falls in line.....

I thought it was well established that WSJ had a bit of a right-wing bias... or was that NYT?

The WSJ most certainly leans right.

That's what I thought, and was kind of my point.... the two headlines shown in the comment I quoted both had an obvious right-wing "lean" (I mean, at some point, I think they gotta fall over... unless they are Weeples) to them.

weebles wobble but they wont fall down