Debating voter fraud truly is an interesting experience. You need a photo ID to rent a car, purchase alcohol and tobacco, apply for welfare, rent an apartment, buy a home, and countless other things. Yet it’s suddenly “racist” to require an ID for voting?

We’re told that Republicans only favor voter ID not because of voter fraud, but to disenfranchise voters who simply can’t obtain a photo ID. Indeed, Democrats truly believe a solid block of those voting for them are apparently too incompetent to get themselves a government-issued photo ID. Given you (usually) need an ID to apply for a job, and certainly need one to apply for welfare, it’s unclear what exactly these people are doing all day.

Experience The Political Insider without ads

Hide ads now

A common talking point from the left is that the documented cases of voter fraud are low, but of course there are few documented cases when we do literally nothing to protect against voter fraud. In a state that doesn’t require a photo ID, how do you prove someone’s lying? You don’t. If 10 people are ticketed for speeding in a day, does that mean only 10 people sped? Of course not.

Part of the reason Democrats fear further investigation into voter fraud is because they know evidence will be found.

As we reported on previously in August, it has since been discovered that in California there are 11 counties that have more registered voters than citizens. Ten out of the eleven voted for Hillary Clinton (shocker!) – and those are just eleven counties in one state. The situation of Pennsylvania was similar, according to the Associated Press, which reported that “non-citizen immigrants may have cast 544 ballots illegally in elections spanning 18 years in Pennsylvania, state election officials said Wednesday.”

Experience The Political Insider without ads

Hide ads now

And that’s not all!

According to Judicial Watch, the organization has filed a lawsuit “against the Commonwealth of Kentucky over its failure to take reasonable steps to maintain accurate voter registration lists. The lawsuit alleges that 48 Kentucky counties have more registered voters than citizens over the age of 18. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, Central Division (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Alison Lundergan Grimes et al.(No. 3:17-cv-00094)).”

More from the report: “Kentucky was one of 12 states to which Judicial Watch sent notice-of-violation letters this year threatening to sue because they have counties in which the number of registered voters exceeds the number of citizens of voting age. Both the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) and the Help America Vote Act require states to take reasonable steps to maintain accurate voting rolls.”

Officials in Kentucky claimed that the lawsuit is without merit (of course). A spokesman named Bradford Queen told Fox News that “We are confident the facts will prove Kentucky is following the law and doing its due diligence to protect voters’ rights and franchise.”

He continued;“Judicial Watch is a right-wing organization masquerading as a citizen advocacy group, and a majority of its lawsuits have been dismissed,” Queen said. “In reality, Judicial Watch wants to make it harder for people to vote, and the Commonwealth and its State Board of Elections won’t bow to their efforts.”

Judicial Watch wants voting to be done correctly. This isn’t a voter suppression effort.

What do you think? Is Judicial Watch right to sue Kentucky? Tell us your thoughts below!