(Aug. 9, 2016) — “Good evening, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to another exciting episode of ‘Pulse of the Nation.’ I’m your Roving Reporter and today finds us at the home of a Democrat strategist in Laguna Beach, California.

“Miss, ah, Smith? Oh, yes, Miss ‘No-First-Name’ Smith, welcome to our show. Miss Smith asked to be on the show as long as we protected her identity and disguised her voice. We’ve been getting more and more requests for hidden identities, have you noticed that? People are afraid of repercussions, and with good reason.

“Anyway, what do you have for us?”

“The city of Chicago used to be known for its fraudulent voting, and still is. When a registered voter died, their name was not removed from the voter registration list so, even in death, their name continued to vote. When the scam first started the deceased voted just once, but as time went on ways were found to allow the deceased to vote multiple times.  Cats, dogs and people who never existed were added to the voter registration list: it’s easy to scam the vote using an absentee ballot.

“On top of the old ways to ‘ADD THE VOTE,’ there’s always new and innovative ways to scam – ADD THE VOTE — the system, the latest being, of course, voting without identification. Now we all know that a proper ID is required to collect government assistance – Food Stamps and Welfare – and for many other things, such as opening a bank account. Also, many landlords do a background check on prospective clients and require a legal photo ID.

“For some reason the idea, the very thought, of the democratic process allowed to operate with impunity is abhorrent to socialists – as if exercising ‘free choice’ somehow ‘taints’ everyone involved, sort-of like catching an infectious disease – so they go overboard to control the results.

“Those who are against the philosophy of ‘one person; one vote’ are enemies to the whole idea of the Constitution: win at any price, including the destruction of the Constitution and country. Let felons vote; allow illegal immigrants to vote to determine the course of the nation, to the determent of all.

“Reminds one of allowing Muslims into our country; people who will not assimilate and hold the Constitution as the law of the land.  Rather, they will follow their own law – Sharia – while the DOJ does absolutely nothing, and by doing nothing they are, in fact, endorsing the overthrow of our country. That there is no greater enemy of our country than our own Department of Justice is beyond argument.

“Perhaps the most egregious example of DOJ complicity was the infamous ‘MY PEOPLE’ case of 2009. There was massive voting fraud in the 2008 and 2012 elections, but I’m going to tell you straight-out, nothing will compare with the fraud that is about to occur this year.

“But what about gerrymandering? Won’t that play a part?”

“Peanuts. It’s the machines that will be tampered with. It’s not counting the overseas military vote. The fraud will be beyond massive, but the biggest fraud of all will be done by the DOJ, which will ‘look the other way’; will ‘investigate fully’ in February 2017; and will ‘monitor the situation.’

“In other words, the DOJ will ‘elect’ Hillary — who may or may not have medical problems — and maybe Obama could fill in as, well, use you’re imagination.

“I could be wrong, you know. Trump will get twice as many votes as Hillary; I don’t think there’s any possible doubt of it. And, to be truthful, the country needs Trump; the world needs Trump.

“It’s the petrol dollars at work: Western Civilization has given the Arabs billions upon billions of dollars to bribe our politicians and bureaucrats: we’re paying for our own destruction, and if you don’t think that Hillary isn’t working hand-in-hand with Tehran, then you better think twice.

“Hillary is addicted to power and money and blind to the fact that she’s being used; played as a puppet on a string, to dance to any tune that Tehran wants her to jump to. Anyway, thought I’d better warn you all so you’re not disappointed when Trump wins the vote but loses the election.”

“Well, folks, our time is up. Sure like to thank, eh, Miss Smith for her insightful comments and warning that the current administration will use every trick in the book to get Hillary ‘elected.’ This is your Roving Reporter, on behalf of the crew, wishing you all a good night: Goodnight.

“Scary show, knowing that the DOJ is running the game. We’re sunk. Maybe we’ll have a fresh garden salad with a burger on the side: my treat.”

Semper Fi


Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Dear Readers;
    I’ve already received a number of, eh, shall I say “inquisitive remarks” about “dogs voting in Chicago”.
    Let me state from the outset that there have been no such comments from anyone from Chicago; from anyone who has ever passed through Chicago, if even for a plane change at Ohara; from anyone who has relatives in Chicago; from anyone who has ever known or associated with anyone who may have known someone who knew someone from Chicago; or a Chicago Cub fan.
    THE QUESTION: “Surely you jest when you wrote ‘dogs vote in Chicago’.”
    THE ANSWER: Not only do individual dogs vote in Chicago, but whole packs of dogs vote in Chicago; dead dogs vote in Chicago; and even whole packs of dead dogs vote in Chicago.
    “Elsie and Gert”, the Rhinoceros sisters who reside at the Brookfield Zoo, also “vote”, as had their moms and dads before them*.
    And so, yes, Virginia, dogs DO vote in Chicago.
    *Next time you’re at the Brookfield Zoo, look closely in the back of the Rhino enclosure and you will see a singed autograph of Al Capone with one of Elsie and Gert’s great-aunts.

  2. A perfect example is the Coleman v Franken Senate race that resulted in the Senate getting the majority needed to pass ObamaCare.

    The corrupt politicians are so afraid of our questioning the corruption in the voting process that they had the IRS attack the “True the Vote” http://truethevote.org/ Organization.

    When 1,099 felons vote in race won by 312 ballots
    By Byron York (@ByronYork) • 8/6/12 12:00 AM

    In the eyes of the Obama administration, most Democratic lawmakers, and left-leaning editorial pages across the country, voter fraud is a problem that doesn’t exist. Allegations of fraud, they say, are little more than pretexts conjured up by Republicans to justify voter ID laws designed to suppress Democratic turnout.

    That argument becomes much harder to make after reading a discussion of the 2008 Minnesota Senate race in “Who’s Counting?”, a new book by conservative journalist John Fund and former Bush Justice Department official Hans von Spakovsky. Although the authors cover the whole range of voter fraud issues, their chapter on Minnesota is enough to convince any skeptic that there are times when voter fraud not only exists but can be critical to the outcome of a critical race.

    In the ’08 campaign, Republican Sen. Norm Coleman was running for re-election against Democrat Al Franken. It was impossibly close; on the morning after the election, after 2.9 million people had voted, Coleman led Franken by 725 votes.

    Franken and his Democratic allies dispatched an army of lawyers to challenge the results. After the first canvass, Coleman’s lead was down to 206 votes. That was followed by months of wrangling and litigation. In the end, Franken was declared the winner by 312 votes. He was sworn into office in July 2009, eight months after the election.

    During the controversy a conservative group called Minnesota Majority began to look into claims of voter fraud. Comparing criminal records with voting rolls, the group identified 1,099 felons — all ineligible to vote — who had voted in the Franken-Coleman race.

    Minnesota Majority took the information to prosecutors across the state, many of whom showed no interest in pursuing it. But Minnesota law requires authorities to investigate such leads. And so far, Fund and von Spakovsky report, 177 people have been convicted — not just accused, but convicted — of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial. “The numbers aren’t greater,” the authors say, “because the standard for convicting someone of voter fraud in Minnesota is that they must have been both ineligible, and ‘knowingly’ voted unlawfully.” The accused can get off by claiming not to have known they did anything wrong.

    Still, that’s a total of 243 people either convicted of voter fraud or awaiting trial in an election that was decided by 312 votes. With 1,099 examples identified by Minnesota Majority, and with evidence suggesting that felons, when they do vote, strongly favor Democrats, it doesn’t require a leap to suggest there might one day be proof that Al Franken was elected on the strength of voter fraud.