A 2021 intelligence review concluded that China considered efforts to influence the election but did not go through with them.

Ticktin said he’s had “certain coordination” with White House officials but declined to specify, citing safety concerns. But his input has successfully led to a presidential action before. Ticktin represents Tina Peters, a former Colorado county clerk imprisoned on state charges arising from breaking into voting equipment, whom Trump said he pardoned in December. (The presidential pardon did not free Peters from her nine-year prison term because the president has no power over state crimes.)

A White House official said the staff is regularly in communication with a variety of outside advocates who want to share their policy ideas with the president, but any speculation about his actions or announcements is just speculation.

“I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future,” Trump said on social media Feb. 13. “I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order,” he added the same day.

Trump is pressuring Republicans to pass legislation to require proof of citizenship for voter registration and ID to cast ballots. The measure, called the Save America Act, passed the House but faces obstacles in the Senate, where Republican leaders have rejected Trump’s demand to change the chamber’s rules to move the legislation forward.

“President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered non-citizen voters,” White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said.

Last June, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released FBI records showing an initial tip alleging a Chinese effort to produce fraudulent driver’s licenses for mail ballots. Suspicions of Chinese ballots spurred the hunt for bamboo fibers in Arizona ballots during a Republican-led audit in 2021, which reaffirmed Joe Biden’s victory in the state.

Gabbard recently was present when the FBI searched a warehouse in Fulton County, Georgia, to seize ballots from the 2020 election there. The affidavit submitted to obtain the search warrant, however, did not allege foreign interference. Her office also examined voting machines used in Puerto Rico looking for cybersecurity vulnerabilities, in coordination with the FBI and the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, according to a spokesperson for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. That inquiry was first reported by Reuters.

“The stage is largely being set by the revelations coming out of foreign powers being involved in influencing the 2020 election,” said Jerome Corsi, who circulated the draft executive order in July. Corsi helped spread the “birtherism” smear against Barack Obama and a conspiracy theory involving slain Democratic staffer Seth Rich, for which he later apologized. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III investigated Corsi as a possible link between WikiLeaks and Roger Stone during the 2016 campaign, which Corsi denied.

“If there was a provable foreign intrusion, that would be a national security emergency and the order could be issued under his powers as commander in chief,” Corsi added.

Sen. Mark R. Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said there is no national emergency.

“We’ve been raising the alarm for weeks about President Trump’s attacks on our elections and now we’re seeing reports that outline how they may be planning to do it,” Warner said in a statement in response to this article. “This is a plot to interfere with the will of voters and undermine both the rule of law and public confidence in our elections.”

The measures listed in the 2025 draft of the proposed executive order include requiring hand-marked and hand-counted paper ballots, requiring voters to register anew for the 2026 midterms with proof of citizenship, and restricting mail ballots to limited circumstances. The draft also proposes authorizing the Justice Department, U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services, the Social Security Administration and the Postal Service to have a role in identifying ineligible voters.

The draft cites emergency authority from laws including the National Emergencies Act of 1976, the Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 and the Defense Production Act of 1950.

Article I, Section 4 of the Constitution assigns power to regulate elections to state legislatures and Congress, with no role for the president. A presidential emergency on elections has never been tested in court.

Trump also signed an executive order last March to require proof of citizenship on voter registration forms and withhold funding from states accepting mail ballots after Election Day. Courts in five cases blocked parts of the order, with three of them pending appeal and another awaiting a ruling, according to a litigation tracker compiled by the legal website Just Security.

“The conduct of our elections is not for any president to decide. And it must never be manipulated to serve a political agenda,” the League of Women Voters, which brought one of the lawsuits against the 2025 order, said in a statement. “We will challenge any executive action that suppresses voters, undermines free and fair elections, or violates the constitutional framework that protects our democracy.”

A Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll this month found 54 percent of American adults, and 55 percent of independents, oppose Trump’s stated desire for the federal government to take over election administration and vote-counting in certain states. Twenty-three percent of adults said they supported it, and the same proportion said they had no opinion.

>>1492302
>OP pic
>rampant sexism
Seriously?

>>1492313
Did you find the bamboo fibers yet?

>>1492313
Yeah.

>>1492302
>declaring a fake emergency again
One trick dictator.

Good. This is what most Americans want. If you have a GOP governor, then you want this. You are tired of voting and want a simple dictatorship, single-party rule.

If enough states elect GOP governors, we may get a Constitutional convention and set it up that way. Even without that, Trump has shown little to no regard for the current Constitution.

We won. Dictator bros ... we fucking WON!

>>1492313
>why would you call grab 'em by the pussy convicted sex offender sexist?!??

You maga yokels are really something else.

>>1492302
He's panicking because he knows that Project 2025 will be raped to death if he doesn't end democracy before the midterms.

>>1492325
>You didn't vote for Kamala! FASCIST!!!

>Strawman

>>1492313
If you think Trump and his cronies aren't raging misogynists, you're dumber than he is. That would be a genuine achievement of the sort that needs to be studied scientifically.

>>1492302
>Pro-Trump activists who say they are in coordination with the White House are circulating a 17-page draft executive order that claims China interfered in the 2020 election as a basis to declare a national emergency that would unlock extraordinary presidential power over voting.
Sort of reminds me when Hillary Clinton claimed Russia interefered in the 2016 election as a basis to make Trump's entire first term about the Mueller probe, which uncovered zero co-ordination or collusion between Trump's campaign with Russia

>>1492351
>>1492331
My fault I guess for not being more clear: how the fuck is sexism linked to fascism?

>>1492362
>which uncovered zero co-ordination or collusion between Trump's campaign with Russia
There were multiple arrests of his campaign members for giving info to Russia.

>>1492371
Fascism loves creating out groups they can rally people against. They usually start with minorities and escalate into anyone not actively part of the main circle (and even a few of them with the people willing to bend the knee as the "good ones"). The whole ideology loves any kind of discrimination they can use to isolate people or shift blame.

>>1492373
I didn't know that, what were their names?

>>1492375
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_charges_brought_in_the_Mueller_special_counsel_investigation
For the US specifically:
>George Papadopoulos
>Paul Manafront
>Rick Gates
>Michael Flynn (Though he was getting money from Turkey)
>Alex van der Zwaan

Interesting how /pol/ is trying t slide this thread now.

>>1492423
why, when they can just deny reality and shitpost around you?

>>1492302
I'm glad there's a plan in place to save the US from Democrats.

>>1492376
>George Papadopoulos
On October 30, 2017, it was revealed that Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos had pleaded guilty earlier in the month to making a false statement to FBI investigators, a felony. The guilty plea was part of a plea bargain in which he agreed to cooperate with the government and "provide information regarding any and all matters as to which the Government deems relevant."
>Paul Manafort and Rick Gates
failing to register as foreign agents for Ukraine.
>Zwaan
false statements Ukraine.
It was all a hoax, huh?
Trump was working against Russia from the looks of it, and that's why Biden allowed Russia to attack Ukraine.
Interesting wiki.
No one was convicted of Russian collusion though. It was all "making false statements to the FBI" which is a felony. And the convictions were all plea deals.

So apparently there was no Russian collusion?

See, even the shill agrees that its Russian Collusion
Maybe we should have executed Trump and his whole campaign team back in 2016 for treason if its that proven
Definitely would have Made America Great Again!

>>1492428
I also liked how Biden ended the Covid pandemic 17 days after he was elected.
>Scams over
>We won
>Back to work!

Love the taste of rent-free shill seething
You're the best clown on this board for sure

>>1492302
Whoever created the OP image is obviously a fucking troon.
This board needs more Vancey Dance vids and less troon poopooganda.

>>1492432
Mad you're having it pointed out, aren't you?

Why exactly is voter ID bad again?

>>1492434
Because tons of people don’t have IDs and can’t easily get them.

>>1492438
What problem is Voter ID actually supposed to fix again?

>>1492439
The rampant, wide-spread voter fraud that doesn’t actually exist.
The real reason is voter suppression, because of course it fucking is.

>>1492440
Seems like there's a compromise here.
If imaginary voter fraud is the problem, then we just need to require imaginary voter ID.

Is an imaginary poll tax a poll tax?

>>1492438
Who are these "tons of people" and why can't they just pop on over to the DMV to get it done?

>>1492438
>Because tons of people don’t have IDs and can’t easily get them.
This is such massive bullshit. The cost of getting a non-driver ID is so low there's absolutely no excuse not to get one. Explain how they can't easily get them. Because they have to wait in line at a DMV? Just like they have to wait in line to vote?

>>1492442
As long as you can pay it with imaginary money.

>>1492445
People that don’t have a passport or an OG birth certificate that matches their current name. Acquiring such things varies from state to state, but it’s generally more complicated and difficult than “just popping over to the DMV.”

>>1492446
See previous, and a poll tax is a poll tax.
Besides, the goal of voter suppression isn’t on the individual level. Even if it was as easy as you say to get a voter ID, an obstacle to voting is still going to result in less voters.

>>1492453
>People that don’t have a passport or an OG birth certificate that matches their current name. Acquiring such things varies from state to state, but it’s generally more complicated and difficult than “just popping over to the DMV.”

Well, if they cared enough about voting, they would spend the 4 years between presidential elections to get it done.

>>1492453
>See previous,
Previous what?

>and a poll tax is a poll tax.
And I asked this question in the last thread and never got an answer. What is a poll tax? Define it.

>>1492455
>Well, if they cared enough about voting, they would spend the 4 years between presidential elections to get it done.
why?
there's no ID requirement to vote

The elections are controlled by each state. Trump having any statement about them is just him blowing more hot air.

>>1492430
I like how Trump sealed off the border 10000%, not one person illegally entered, a month into 2.0. No way he would lie about such a thing.

>>1492457
So what prevents me from going to one polling site, giving a fake name, and voting; then another; then another? I have now given 3 names and have voted 3 times. Now my vote is worth 3 times as much as yours. In fact, why SHOULDN'T I do this?

>>1492459
probably a combination of border security and poverty

>>1492453
I'm still waiting on an answer. Again.

Define poll tax.

>>1492455
No, they wouldn’t, because until until this MAGA push to suppress them they didn’t need those things to vote.

>>1492456
>Previous what?
Previous statement.
>People that don’t have a passport or an OG birth certificate that matches their current name. Acquiring such things varies from state to state, but it’s generally more complicated and difficult than “just popping over to the DMV.”
>What is a poll tax?
>A poll tax, also known as head tax or capitation, is a tax levied as a fixed sum on every liable individual (typically every adult), without reference to income or resources.
>Generally, in the United States, the term "poll tax" is used to mean a tax that must be paid in order to vote, rather than a capitation tax simply.
>The Twenty-fourth Amendment, ratified in 1964, prohibits both Congress and the states from conditioning the right to vote in federal elections on payment of a poll tax or any other type of tax. Poll taxes for State and local elections were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections.

>>1492461
>>Define poll tax.
you know the money you pay transexual hookers for blowjobs?
its like that, but instead your mom pays me to stretch out her jaw

>>1492459
Nothing, but it would be illegal. Your votes under fake names would be found to be fraudulent, and you would likely face legal trouble. I don’t know what the penalty for fraudulent voting is, though.

>>1492462
So what makes a poll tax bad is where you have to pay for a right, yes?

>>1492465
No, not in this context.
>Generally, in the United States, the term "poll tax" is used to mean a tax that must be paid in order to vote, rather than a capitation tax simply.

>>1492463
You sound like a sexual deviant who cannot understand what words mean

>>1492464
IF found. Whereas with voter ID, finding these fraudulent votes would be easier.

>>1492460
Borders within the state? That's not a thing that exists.

>>1492462
So these people could potentially vote fraudulently? I think suppressing fraudulent workers is a good thing.

Someone who is legally entitled to vote can restore their birth certificate. It just takes time and money, time plenty enough between the two Presidential elections.

>>1492466
What's the difference? You're requiring a tax to exercise a right.

>>1492469
but fraudulent voting isn't a thing
this is just the typical republicunt cope that they're going to lose the election
if it really mattered it would have been in the BIG BOOTIFUL BILL, but it wasn't because that was just about stealing as much money as they could for their donors from Americans

>>1492474
>but fraudulent voting isn't a thing
And you know this because...

>>1492469
>IF found.
It likely would be.
>Whereas with voter ID, finding these fraudulent votes would be easier.
And it would also make voting more difficult and disenfranchise millions of Americans, which is the actual goal.
>So these people could potentially vote fraudulently?
No.
>I think suppressing fraudulent workers is a good thing.
Workers?
>It just takes time and money, time plenty enough between the two Presidential elections.
The time between elections is irrelevant, see >>1492462, and requiring someone to pay money to vote is illegal.

>>1492470
The difference is that a tax you need to pay to vote is illegal.

>>1492475
Trust in the election process, but more particularly because Trump’s been banging on about voter fraud for years, pushing countless audits and recounts, all of which have found no evidence of wide-spread voter fraud.

>>1492476
>The difference is that a tax you need to pay to vote is illegal.
So what makes a poll tax bad is where you have to pay for a right, yes?

>>1492477
>pushing countless audits and recounts
chuds have to suppress the memory of the 2020 Maricopa recount finding no illegal votes and confirming that Biden won even harder

>>1492478
english is hard, but sound it out. use the AI tools your supervisor gave you.

>>1492477
>Trust in the election process,
Remember 2016 when democrats were screaming about how the election was rigged by Russia? And then said it wasn't rigged in 2020? And then said it was rigged again in 2024?

>>1492481
no, source?

>>1492478
No. I don’t know of any laws affecting other rights. I’m sure some exist, but they’re not relevant to this topic.
That said, If you’ve got a point to make with this fishing for an answer you like then make it. I’m not going to humor it further.

>>1492481
The claim is that Russia influenced the election via propaganda, disinformation, etc, not that they rigged it. That has nothing to do with voter fraud.

>>1492482
Mueller report.

>>1492482
https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/2018/03/09/russias-impact-election-seen-through-partisan-eyes
66 percent of Democrats believe that it is either definitely or somewhat true that Russian hackers changed vote totals in the 2016 election.
The media convinced 2/3 Democrats that Russia hacked voting machines and changed vote totals. There was no evidence of Russia hacking into voting machine.

>>1492484
>No. I don’t know of any laws affecting other rights. I’m sure some exist, but they’re not relevant to this topic.
And I disagree. You laid out the standard with - and let me get your quote here:
>A poll tax, also known as head tax or capitation, is a tax levied as a fixed sum on every liable individual (typically every adult), without reference to income or resources.

>That said, If you’ve got a point to make with this fishing for an answer you like then make it.
Why is it okay for democrats to enact a tax - a fixed sum on every liable individual - to exercise one right, with their specific intent to discourage citizens, but when Republicans ask for a minuscule "tax" to pay for an ID to vote - not to discourage voting, but to ensure the integrity of elections for both parties - then it's unconstitutional?

>>1492481
Remember 2020 when MAGAts were screaming about how the election was rigged by democrats? And then said it wasn't rigged in 2024? And then said it would be rigged again in 2026?

>>1492487
I also quoted that
>Generally, in the United States, the term "poll tax" is used to mean a tax that must be paid in order to vote, rather than a capitation tax simply.
That’s the context we’re using. We’re not talking about taxes on other rights.
>Why is it okay for democrats to enact a tax - a fixed sum on every liable individual - to exercise one right, with their specific intent to discourage citizens
I likely wouldn’t say it is, depending on the context, but that’s both irrelevant to this topic, and as I just said, I don’t know of any laws or amendments declaring it to be illegal.
but when Republicans ask for a minuscule "tax" to pay for an ID to vote - not to discourage voting, but to ensure the integrity of elections for both parties - then it's unconstitutional?
It is very blatantly to discourage voting. Otherwise they would pair this with free, standardized federal IDs, as is practice in other countries with voter ID. You’ll note that the majority of the legitimate voters that the Save act would disenfranchise predominately vote Democrat.
As to why it’s unconstitutional,
>The Twenty-fourth Amendment, ratified in 1964, prohibits both Congress and the states from conditioning the right to vote in federal elections on payment of a poll tax or any other type of tax. Poll taxes for State and local elections were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections.

>>1492493
>That’s the context we’re using. We’re not talking about taxes on other rights.
And I'm asking why it it acceptable to tax one right but not another?

>It is very blatantly to discourage voting.
And I never got an answer to that question either. How the fuck is it so hard to get an ID in this country? You literally go to the DMV, wait in line, and pay less than the cost of a happy meal. ANYONE in this country can do it.

Instead of answering that question, you went on about passports and OG birth certificates when I'm talking about the current law. What is in effect right now, not some hypothetical Republican wish list that will probably get blocked by the Supreme Court.

>As to why it’s unconstitutional,
Why is it okay to do this for one right but not another?

>>1492331
>>1492351
You're making it sound like misogyny isn't awesome.

>>1492496
>And I'm asking why it it acceptable to tax one right but not another?
Because taxing this right is illegal and unconstitutional.
>How the fuck is it so hard to get an ID in this country? You literally go to the DMV, wait in line, and pay less than the cost of a happy meal. ANYONE in this country can do it.
A state ID will not qualify you to vote under the Save act. And even if it did, it’d still be a poll tax on voting, which is illegal and unconstitutional.
>when I'm talking about the current law. What is in effect right now
…how? You’re talking about voter ID. There are no current laws to that effect.
The push for voter ID that exists right now is the Save act, which would require levels of identification not covered by state IDs and would disenfranchise millions of Americans.
>Why is it okay to do this for one right but not another?
As far as I know, other rights don’t have protections like the 24th amendment. Perhaps they should? That doesn’t change that poll taxes on voting is illegal, though.

>>1492496
why does voter ID have to be the solution?
just make voting mandatory. vote or pay a fine.
everyone then either makes sure they vote, or gets audited and fined
every voter counted and verified, 100% participation, pays for itself

>>1492500
>Because taxing this right is illegal and unconstitutional.
So basically we're down to any right that I want can be taxed without a problem, for any arbitrary reason, but any right you want can't have even the lowest possible tax or else it's illegal and unconstitutional.

>A state ID will not qualify you to vote under the Save act.
That's not what I'm reading. It's not limited to just birth certificates and passports only.

>…how? You’re talking about voter ID. There are no current laws to that effect.
This started here >>1492438 with the claim that "tons" of people don't have IDs
>[citation needed]
and can't easily get them. Which is bullshit. Fucking whoreshit. It is one of the easi - y'know what? Fuck it! If you're too retarded to get a non-driver's ID then you don't deserve to vote. You're too fucking stupid to be trusted with that power at this point.

And if you're in some weird blue state that doesn't require any ID to vote... how the fuck do you know there's no fraud? ...
>checks which states don't require ID to vote
>14 blue states and D.C.
Go fucking figure.

>>1492504
God you're esl

>>1492351
I think the woman hating is the only genuine belief 4chan has. Almost every other belief is slathered in irony and lulz, existing in a sort of gray area where even they don't know where they truly stand. And by woman hate, I mean actual hate, not the sort of milquetoast "men and women have their places" beliefs that boomers practiced.

>>1492505
>God you're esl
Every time I see this post I know you got owned.

>>1492507
them in particular?

nta, but you're being called a retarded esl because you're deliberately refusing to acknowledge the 24th amendment.

>>1492507
It's not winning to be illiterate esl shill

>>1492509
>It's not winning to be illiterate esl shill
Your sentence is grammatically rough and reads low-IQ. If you’re going to insult someone, at least structure it correctly.
>It’s not a win to be an illiterate ESL shill.
>Being an illiterate ESL shill isn’t winning.
>It’s not winning when you’re an illiterate ESL shill.

>>1492508
nta and expecting someone to present ID is not a poll tax. see Crawford v. Marion County Election Board

>>1492504
>So basically we're down to any right that I want can be taxed without a problem, for any arbitrary reason, but any right you want can't have even the lowest possible tax or else it's illegal and unconstitutional
No.
>That's not what I'm reading. It's not limited to just birth certificates and passports only.
The Save act requires proof of citizenship. State IDs in most states don’t give that. What does is passports and birth certificates that match your current name.
I’m pretty sure we’ve already had this conversation.
>If you're too retarded to get a non-driver's ID then you don't deserve to vote. You're too fucking stupid to be trusted with that power at this point.
Your opinion is noted, but that’s not your decision to make.
Stupidity has nothing to do with it, it’s about the required time, effort, and especially cost. The cost because that’s illegal and unconstitutional.

Esl shill really loves humiliation doesn't he.

>>1492511
>hurr, I can't read
look, another? esl retard

>>1492515
English is my second language. And I’m still running circles around you. Big off
>Its a poll tax!!!!
>SCOTUS says no
>18 years ago
lol. lmao even.

>>1492516
You sure are a braggadocious faggot tonight esl shill, what happened? Double time at the farm?

>>1492516
>I’m still running circles around you.
>Big off
Now that’s just perfect.

>>1492517
No need to be upset, just do some light reading before you try make an argument. It will save you the embarrassment.

>>1492518
>ha! a typo! now the absolutely idiotic argument I tried to make is forgotten!

>>1492520
no, you're just wrong on both points and having some sort of drug influenced meltdown
it'll be okay. drink some water.

>>1492521
>u... ur wrong
SCOTUS did not rule that voter ID requirements are not a poll tax?

>>1492519
esl shill, you aren't arguing when you post here, you're just embarrassing yourself and your ancestors

>>1492523
I'm sorry, who was it that argued that voter ID is a poll tax? It was you right?

>>1492524
And that was your wrong

>>1492522
what does that have to do with >>1492504
refusing the acknowledge the 24th amendment?
>So basically we're down to any right that I want can be taxed without a problem, for any arbitrary reason, but any right you want can't have even the lowest possible tax or else it's illegal and unconstitutional.
you're just a retarded esl shitposter and you should kill yourself

>>1492526
Dealt with in Crawford.

>>1492520
Making a typo when you’re bragging about your superior English skills is pretty embarrassing. A big off, if you will. And no, I didn’t “try” to make an argument, I just did. There is no try. And considering you’ve run away from it, I’d say it went pretty well.

>>1492527
english teacher, refund, you scammed!

>>1492528
Adults don't get embarrassed by typos. And no, you very much tried to make an argument, its not actually an argument because what you tried to argue has actually been settled law for ~18 years.

And, reminder, you're losing to someone writing in their second language.

>>1492529
>english teacher, refund, you scammed!
Not even a sentence - just random fragments smashed together. Ironically, I think you may also be ESL.

>>1492530
You don't seem to be embarrassed by any of the embarrassing shit you post

>>1492533
Reminding you that your argument got shut down when you were still wearing diapers is certainly very embarrassing, yes.

>>1492534
Don't remind us of the attire of the man you're shilling for, esl shill. It's already bad enough for you

>>1492535
I'm not shilling for Trump. I'm educating you.

>>1492536
so why is voter id necessary

>>1492536
>I'm not shilling for trump
LOL

>>1492530
When they’re bragging about not making typos they probably should.
>And no, you very much tried to make an argument, its not actually an argument because what you tried to argue has actually been settled law for ~18 years.
That’s not what those words mean.
As for the Crawford case you’re citing, the Supreme Court ruled that Indiana requiring photo IDs to vote was legal because Indiana photo IDs are free. It’s got nothing to do with poll taxes on voting, which remain illegal.

>>1492539
I dont think anyone is arguing poll taxes are legal.

>>1492538
Yes.

>>1492540
>>1492511

>>1492542
Thats not an argument that poll taxes are legal. Thats *the law* which states that requiring ID is not per se a poll tax.

>>1492543
You're *a faggot* who *lost the argument*

>>1492543
>Thats not an argument that poll taxes are legal.
Then why the hell are you bringing it up in a discussion about poll taxes being illegal?
>Thats *the law* which states that requiring ID is not per se a poll tax.
No, the ruling states that Indiana requiring photo IDs to vote is legal. It has nothing to do with poll taxes.

>>1492544
If you're upset, maybe its time to stop posting.

esl shill is projecting again

>>1492545
>you bringing it up in a discussion about poll taxes being illegal?
Because your argument is poll taxs are illegal, id's to vote are poll taxes, hence id's to vote are illegal.

This is not what the law says.

>>1492548
>This is not what the law says.
its not even what they said

>>1492549
its exactly what they said. Requiring ID is not a per se poll tax.

Thats why the SAVE exact is written exactly the way its written.
>to comply with the 24A

It is irrelevant if you or I think ID is or isn't a Poll Tax.
What has the current supreme court said about the legality of voter ID requirements?

>>1492548
>Because your argument is poll taxs are illegal, id's to vote are poll taxes, hence id's to vote are illegal.
No, it isn't. IDs to vote aren't poll taxes if they're free, as is the case in Indiana.

>>1492552
Okay, so we're agreed that the SAVE Act is not a poll tax.

>>1492553
No, we're not.

>>1492553
Nobody agrees with you esl shill

>>1492554
Then you should read Crawford.

>>1492556
Did. I just addressed that.

>>1492557
No, you didnt because if you read Crawford you would know what the Court said about incidental costs.

Just assume I am a couple steps ahead of you.

>>1492558
Having to buy something in order to vote is not an incidental cost for voting.

>>1492558
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Washington
This Crawford?

>>1492559
Read Crawford.

>>1492558
Have you heard the phrase we have about people who assume, esl shill

>>1492561
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/most-expensive-judicial-election-ever
This Crawford?

>>1492560
Read the thread.

>>1492561
Did. If you've got a specific part of it to cite then do so.

>>1492564
God you're desperate

>>1492565
You haven't, else you would know what I am talking about. Go read the ruling, its 16 pages, and get back to me.

>>1492566
>God you're desperate
This you? >>1492563 >>1492560

>>1492567
How many times are you going to lose the same argument in a single thread? Christ

>>1492569
Lose what argument? We're not arguing yet, I'm still teaching you the law. Once you know what the fuck you're talking about, maybe then we can have an argument.

>>1492567
You're right. I skimmed it, ctrl+F'd around, and read a summary. I didn't find whatever you're talking about.
And no, I'm just going to conclude you're full of shit, because if you actually had anything here you'd just cite it and shut me up.

>>1492570
You have taught us nothing but the fact that you love humiliating yourself over and over. And over and over and over, and over and over...

>>1492571
If you cant put in the effort to read 16 pages then what the fuck is the point?

And yeah, dude, I'm phrasing the specific term weird because I knew you would just ctrl+F. Again, assume I am always a step ahead.

One must assume esl shill happy

>>1492474
>but fraudulent voting isn't a thing
Yes it is, lmao. https://electionfraud.heritage.org/categories
https://www.reuters.com/article/fact-check/re-examining-how-and-why-voter-fraud-is-exceedingly-rare-in-the-us-ahead-of-th-idUSL1N2XP2AI/

I agree it is not common (or not commonly found out), but to say it doesn't exist is stupid. Likewise, someone putting in the effort to actually get an ID isn't a bad thing. You need your ID for shit.

>>1492476
>likely
According to what metric
>disenfranchise
All they need to do is to get their ID. It's not that hard.
>no
Why not? If I can go to several polling places without an ID, they can go to several polling places.
>workers
Typo, I meant to say "voters."
>require money/time between elections
No one is saying you require money to vote. Also while MAGA has been pushing for voter ID, I remember it still being an issue going back at least since the 2000s.

https://verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/NCFER_2001.pdf

>>1492572
>humiliating yourself
Its an anonymous board. You must be an exceedingly fragile person if you think ego factors into it.

>>1492576
I'm sure your ego is being suppressed to great degrees given you're a shill who gets nothing to pleasure billionaires. Do you think that's a good thing?

>>1492559
Yes, it is. By that logic paying for gas to drive to the polling station or paying a bus fare is a type of poll tax.

>>1492573
Full of shit it is, then. No, I'm not going to read 16 pages of legalize to make your argument for you. You don't sound serious at all.

>>1492575
>heritage.org
Jesus christ, anon.
>According to what metric
The fact that we don't have much voter fraud, as you said.
>Why not?
Excuse me, I meant that their votes would be counted as fraudulent. They could still do it, it just wouldn't work.
>All they need to do is to get their ID.
Not under the Save act.
>No one is saying you require money to vote.
Not under the Save act.
We've been talking about this all thread, so sorry, I'm not going to go over it again.

>>1492577
>Do you think that's a good thing?
Having laws in place to ensure that voters are who they say they are? like in almost every country in the rest of the world? Yes.

>>1492579
Is 16 pages a lot of reading for you? A daunting challenge?

>>1492580
Nice cherry pick, but we're talking about how you are a shameless mouthpiece for people who will never even give you scraps, esl shill

>>1492430
No, he just implemented actually viable strategies and measures, plus the release of the vaccines, so that the problem got under control faster. A million Americans died to covid in the first year of the pandemic. A. Million. If you lot hadn't gone full retard about it, a lot of them would still be alive to vote Republican today.

>>1492582
I dont want them to give me anything. I make my own money just fine.

>>1492579
>heritage
Yeah, and?
>don't have much
Oh, we don't have MUCH voter fraud now. Before it was "we have no voter fraud."
>counted as fraudulent
Except we know that there is SOME voter fraud. And since investigators are generally incompetent, I would assume that there's at least twice as much going on.
>under the Save act
Which is a law that can be changed, yes. If you're basing your entire argument on "well this law made it illegal" you do realize that laws can and do get repealed all the time.
>requires money
Except you're a retard who is arguing that "incidental costs" aren't.

>>1492584
Now this is sad. You've really been iceberg slimmed, huh

>>1492586
Are you lonely or something? I've noticed you never want to talk about the news.

>>1492585
>Oh, we don't have MUCH voter fraud now. Before it was "we have no voter fraud."
I never said we had no voter fraud, I said that it wasn't widespread.
>I would assume that there's at least twice as much going on.
Good for you.
>Which is a law that can be changed, yes. If you're basing your entire argument on "well this law made it illegal" you do realize that laws can and do get repealed all the time.
Great. They haven't repealed the 24th amendment. You can't just make laws that go against the constitution, that's the whole point.
>Except you're a retard who is arguing that "incidental costs" aren't.
That's not what I said.

>>1492587
Nta, but I'm lonely and the new is always bad. There. /news/ has concluded.

>>1492371
One of the big by-words of facists in Italy and germany was that women being able to read or have their own bank accounts or not being baby factories is what's crushing civilization.
>>1492426
Ivan you can barely speak english you need to get to the border and get cubed

>>1492426
What were they making false statements about anon?

It's so weird to me that americans don't have national ID, I never gave it much thoughts but I always assumed that having a little plastic card that says that you're a citizen is basically standard for every country with a printer.

>>1492575
>not commonly found out
unicorns aren't commonly found because they don't exist
its only an issue because republicunts know they're going to lose the election and are resorting to naked partisan bullshit

if it was really important, they would have immediately included it in the big bill after bitching about it again all election season

>>1492599
It's called a driver's license. And besides, our precious federal gov't just told us that their national ID (called REAL ID) *isn't* valid ID.
That's right, motherfucker.
Now what?

>>1492438
So, you're telling me that people who can't adult can't vote (they wouldn't any way)?
What's the downside here?

>>1492592
>One of the big by-words of facists in Italy and germany was that women being able to read or have their own bank accounts or not being baby factories is what's crushing civilization.
So was America in the 1930s a fascist nation?

>>1492608
Not them, but yes it was and it is now.

>>1492453
>People that don’t have a passport or an OG birth certificate that matches their current name.
>current name
This is suppressing troon votes, isnt it? Based.

>>1492599
>>1492602
>And besides, our precious federal gov't just told us that their national ID (called REAL ID) *isn't* valid ID.
Oh wow you just made shit up and lied again for the 100000th time today didnt you you leftist faggot

Real IDs are valid as long as they show US citizenship. A real id can be issued to non citizens.

I know you faggots just love to lie and gaslight but it's getting old

>>1492930
Also tradwives

>>1492936
No, those come with pedigree papers.

The new bet is trump will get maduro to 'confess' he 'interfered' in the 2020 election and then use that take control of the election and steal it.

>>1492956
I hope he does it.

>>1492351
This is why they're perfectly justified to just shut down elections entirely. Some people are so retarded that they don't deserve a fair say, and anyone left of fascism is actually that retarded.

>>1492961
trump outright admitted to dragging the US into the latest Republican forever war in the middle east because he's also trying to blame Iran for his 2020 election loss, so yes, it's going to happen.

The Federal government has been interfering in state elections for decades. Voting Rights Act of 1965 for example. Although the President has no Constitutional authority to intervene now, neither did Congress or President Johnson in 1965.

>>1493030
>neither did Congress
Is there something ambiguous about the Elections Clause and which Federal branch it assigns the power to?