President Obama Triggers Election Eve Controversy With Interview That Suggests “Undocumented Citizens” Can Vote

unknown-1One of the controversies that has been raging in this election is the allegation of Republicans, including Donald Trump, that illegal immigrants have been voting around the country. An interview with Hispanic activist group “Mitú” has now magnified this controversy after President Barack Obama appeared to say that non-citizens could vote and that there is no way that they would be investigated. Fox News’ Neil Cavuto and dozens of sites cried foul at what they saw as an explicit encouragement of such voting.  The statement came in an interview with Mitú’s Gina Rodriguez who asked the President is “undocumented citizens” are at risk if they vote. The President assured them that they have nothing to fear. It is a extremely poorly crafted question from what appears an amateur interviewer. I do not believe that President Obama was trying to encourage illegal voting but both the question and answer left many incensed.

Here is the exchange (the video is below):

Rodriguez: “Many of the millennials, DREAMers, undocumented citizens — and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country — are fearful of voting. So, if I vote, will immigration [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?”

Obama: “Not true. First of all, when you vote, you are a citizen yourself, and there is not a situation where the voting rolls are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera. The sanctity of the vote is strictly confidential in terms of who you voted for.”

Putting aside the contraction of an “undocumented citizen,” the answer to the question is clear: undocumented person cannot vote in this country.

I am certainly willing to give the President the benefit of the doubt that he heard “millennials” and might have thought that the question was whether their families (which might include illegal immigrants) would be at risk. Nevertheless, the President could have missed the reference. I am not entirely sure what Rodriquez meant by the question.  However, the President clearly states that “when you vote, you are a citizen yourself.”  The confusion is over the use of “undocumented citizen” to refer to illegal immigrants.

The Washington Post published a study on the question of the impact of voting by undocumented persons back in 2014.  Given the controversy over this very issue, it should have been a misstatement that the White House corrected immediately. Conversely, if this tape is doctored, they should make such a statement on the inaccurate or false editing. I have found no statement from the White House even though I cannot understand how the answer to that question could be construed as true — unless you cut cut everything after the word “millennial,” which makes the question nonsensical since there is no reason why an actual citizen — millennial or non-millennial — would be investigated after voting for possible illegal immigrants in a household. However, it is certainly possible that the President thought that some hispanic voters might worry that giving their address during voting might lead to authorities including the address in later searches or investigations into undocumented relatives.

The U.S. government makes the exclusion of illegal immigrants clear:

Who Can Vote?

You can vote in U.S. elections if you:

Are a U.S. citizen
Meet your state’s residency requirements
You can be homeless and still meet these requirements.
Are 18 years old on or before Election Day
You can register to vote before you turn 18 if you will be 18 by Election Day. Check your state’s registration age requirements.
Register to vote by your state’s voter registration deadline
The one exception is for residents of North Dakota, which doesn’t have voter registration.
Who CAN’T Vote?

Non-citizens, including permanent legal residents
For President in the general election: U.S. citizens residing in U.S. territories
Some people with felony convictions. Rules vary by state. Check with your state elections office about the laws in your state.
Some people who are mentally incapacitated. Rules vary by state.

President Obama’s comments has predictably exploded on the Internet at a time when the Democrats are also opposing voter identification laws used to confirm voter status. I am baffled why there has been no immediate correction by the White House.

States like Virginia make such acts a misdemeanor (or felony for procuring or assisting illegal voting):

§ 24.2-1004. Illegal voting and registrations.
A. Any person who wrongfully deposits a ballot in the ballot container or casts a vote on any voting equipment, is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.

B. Any person who intentionally (i) votes more than once in the same election, whether those votes are cast in Virginia or in Virginia and any other state or territory of the United States, (ii) procures, assists, or induces another to vote more than once in the same election, whether those votes are cast in Virginia or in Virginia and any other state or territory of the United States, (iii) votes knowing that he is not qualified to vote where and when the vote is to be given, or (iv) procures, assists, or induces another to vote knowing that such person is not qualified to vote where and when the vote is to be given is guilty of a Class 6 felony.

Here is the interview:

74 thoughts on “President Obama Triggers Election Eve Controversy With Interview That Suggests “Undocumented Citizens” Can Vote”

  1. What’s this? Obama declines to see that the laws of the United States are properly executed?
    Zut alors!
    I’m shocked! Shocked!
    Actually, I’d be shocked if he DID see that the laws of the United States are properly executed.

  2. I find this extremely disturbing as Podesta worked with Bill, Obama and now HRC. Who are these creepy people?

  3. I believe Obama, Hillary and others have had a hidden agenda for several years. Because they cannot produce a black majority, they have settled for a white minority. That involves changing the American demographic, and Obama’s entire immigration policy has been centered around it.

    1. And that’s you’re worst nightmare isn’t it? How would Obama or Hillary ever produce a “black majority”? And yet you believe that? Blacks are not Hispanics and Reagan was the one that created Illegals amnesty 1982 the bill made nearly 3 million illegal immigrants eligible for amnesty. And yet, during his two terms in office, President Barack Obama has deported more people— 2 million in total—than any other president And yet you believe garbage because you’re scared your White skin is not going to keep you protected from the racism you have wheeled on everyone else. My suggestion to you is… well, I’ve got nothing. Oh well.

      1. OIf course you don’t. Piano Keys are allowed only one note. It may be played hard or soft, fast or slow but it is only one note. For a continuation those that play the keys and operate pedals and the organ stops go to others who in similar fashion are also one note – and allowed no more. Rational Egoism if you were allowed that level of education and perhaps assigned additional roles.

        But the education system deemed you worth of only that one note until such time as the player sees a need for a different note and no need for your note plink plink plonk. something is changed and you become a new note.

        The sad part is you, like all humans have the ability to recognize an ability to do much more not only be more notes but create the music.Test it, refine it, let it blossom into a masterpiece and then judge it as worthy or not worthy.

        But the player bangs the key over and over ‘submit submit submit’ and you are left with ‘oh well’ but take heart. perhaps if the key doesn’t break it will be reprogrammed and you can then end the new ‘one note’ with ‘Whatever?”

        Doestoevsky Notes From the Underground applied by one who sees more and sadly has to reject a one note instrument. Like Diogenes the search continues.

  4. I continue to be astonished every time I read JT come out with yet, another, lame, bizarre and fantastical excuse for the illegal deeds of the President and Hillary. Really–it’s wild how someone, so purportedly bright and intelligent, justifies–at least, to himself–the nonsensical gibberish that he claims. Actually, it’s downright frightening. Let’s get this straight–you are willing to bestow upon the President the benefit of the doubt–that he completely misunderstood and/or misheard the question–despite the fact that the White House never issued any statement alleging said misunderstanding or misinterpretation? I’m baffled. Truly baffled. Then, on top of it–the cherry on the top–you blame the person posing the question, since that person–a mere amateur, in your mind–crafted a poorly worded inquiry? Great–let’s blame the amateur for the poorly worded question and forget about the answer emanating from our Traitor-in-Chief. An answer for which there were no additional statements, from the White House, denying its validity. Seriously, you blame the interviewer. It would be laughable if it weren’t so scary, especially coming from an educated and knowledgeable individual, with decades of experience in the field of law. As I was reading this nonsense–especially the part about trying to hang this on the interviewer–I couldn’t help but think of the old saying, which seems so apropos—the girl who can’t dance always claims that the band cannot play.

  5. “I am baffled why there has been no immediate correction by the White House.”

    Why? Democrats oppose purging the voter rolls of fraud or requiring a photo ID. In effect, they make it as easy as possible for voter fraud to take place.

    Why would they contradict a statement that clearly encourages illegal aliens to illegally vote, while simultaneously giving Obama plausible deniability since he included the word “citizen” in his answer, just before assuring that there would be no investigations. They tend to vote Democrat. The rule of law will always come second to the logistics of gathering power through votes, however obtained.

    1. Not to be paranoid but because this subject has been discussed at length on other forums..

      First there is no plausible deniability as it the ‘appearance of impropriety’ was established by the verbiage uttered and then not immediately corrected or at the least in the next hour or so.

      Second think of the phrase ‘never let a good crisis go to waste’ and add to it the current governments penchant for sticking their nose and ears in everyone’s privacy, the new facility in Utah, and a demonstrated purpose and resolve to ignore or vanish civil rights

      With that in mind I would not discount entirely a continued building of an atmosphere for federal take over of voting along with continuing to require issue of federal ID’s a policy very close to completion and the publics willing acceptance of not only such ID’s but also carrying a pin point locater beacon on their persons.

      The act describe may have been staged to fit the moment or may be how shall I say this, a legitimate illegitimate act by one or more parties. Either way it’s a mild crisis added to some other events that serves to promote citizen control and control freedom of speech, travel and by the way voting.

      Something to keep in mind.

  6. “I am not entirely sure what Rodriquez meant by the question.”

    She explicitly said that she considers illegal aliens citizens because they contribute to this country. Meaning, anyone who is here is a citizen in her eyes. She stated that these illegal aliens would like to (illegally) vote but are afraid that they would be deported because it is yet another law they would be breaking. Can they vote?

    Obama’s answer was that voting was anonymous.

    He also said that you are a citizen when you vote. But she said you are a citizen if you contribute to this country. So was Obama saying that by voting, an illegal alien was a citizen in that capacity? His comment that votes are not investigated clearly encouraged illegal aliens to vote.

    This is why we need to purge the voter rolls of fraudulent entries such as illegal aliens, the deceased, or multiple registrations. We need a valid photo ID to verify identity. However, the Democratic Party vigorously opposes any such effort to combat fraud.

    You need a photo ID to function in society. You need it to cash a check, open a bank account, and get a medical power of attorney notarized. You need it to get an apartment, get a mortgage, refinance your house, or drive a car. Notably, you also need one to enter the grounds of the DNC primaries.

    The answer is not to forbid the use of photo ID. How can you prove you are the person listed without putting a photo to a face? The answer to difficulties in the poor and elderly getting photo ID is to have programs helping them to get it. Which they do. In every state. So communicate about those programs, improve them, but don’t forbid the use of photo ID.

    There is a reason why photos were added to driver’s licenses. And that was rampant fraud.

    1. The Texas voter registration form has a requirement for either a SS number which an illegal cannot get and can be checked against the SS register, or a valid Texas photo ID or drivers license number. It is interesting that our Sen Cruz got his voter registration with a Texas drivers license which did not specify if he was a legal US citizen even though he was also a Canadian citizen. Too bad we did not have a more stringent ID requirement back then. So I can sympathize with those who say we don’t have enough checks on registration. But the reason I am opposed to the current law which a court found to be unConstitutional, is that it was tailored SPECIFICALLY to get rid of a group of voters. I personally would like a Mexican style ID which is a Federally issued voter ID for all voters. That will make it easier to get rid of the dual voting the GOPer snowbirds use when they vote in person in Texas, and then absentee in their home states where they have their businesses or farms.

      1. Do you have a State Drivers license with one of those little chips embedded? Bank Card with same etc. The you already have a Federal ID. All it takes is the right reader at the polling station. Day late and 10 ideas short. Do you have a Cell Radio Telephone? Then you already carry around a locate you on demand device. All it takes is the triangulation equipment. The new smartphones added GPS.

        If they aren’t using the readers or scanners it means they don’t want to and the reason for that is pad the voting. The paltry amount you refer to is nothing compared to the 10 million or so illegals available to vote on command. Go back to science fiction the real world has passed you by.

  7. This is the same FBI that gave Whitey Bulger immunity while they went after the Italian Mafia in eastern New England. While the FBI was chasing the Italian mob, Mr. Bulger was busy doing his own dirty work. We know whitey and his accomplices murdered at least 19 people. One woman that they murdered had her teeth removed so dental records could not be used for identification. Yeah I trust the FBI.

  8. Naww… NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS.. JUST KEEP MOVING.. Anyone seen any Illegals milling around???

  9. The fact is that in Texas before the Voter ID law was passed, the local registrar of voters established her own voter ID law in Montgomery County. A friend of ours who did not have a current Texas drivers license submitted a change of address form to change her registration from Dallas County to our county. She thought everything was OK until she got a notice in the mail telling her that she was NOT a legal voter! Her name is Hispanic and she was born in Houston and graduated from high school there. The form was accepted in Dallas to take her OFF the rolls, but was insufficient to put her on in what is the KKK dominated area. I drove her to the office to register again with her birth certificate, and we thought the matter had been resolved. She shows up at the polling station in an election, and found out she was STILL not allowed to vote. I then drove her to election central where she protested the fact she was not a voter. I told her in a loud voice that if they did not let her vote, our next stop is the US attorneys office in downtown Houston. They decided that maybe she was a legal voter, but forced her to vote a restricted ballot only for state offices and not local ones.

    We then went to the Democratic Party headquarters and told them about this fraud on the part of the GOP. Our rep to the office called and we found out that the office would throw out and deny any voter registration that did not have the OK from the state police. The Texas voter registration form has a method of ID using the SS number of the voter and as well as the number of the Texas state drivers license or DPS ID card. Then we have the state legislature pass the voter ID law which makes it very hard if not impossible for minority voters and elderly to vote. All of the DPS offices are outside of the areas that have public transportation and have hours which make it near impossible to get an ID from the DPS for those who have to work and do not have a car. If a person lives in a rural area and no car, many offices require an hours long or greater drive to get an ID. This is nothing more no less than the attempt by the GOP to disenfranchise poorer, elderly, or minority voters. Why has not Turley spoken out on THIS return to the bad old days of segregation?

    1. I figured you didn’t know the difference between left, right, and center. In the Government Party both Republicans and Demcrats make up the right and left wing of the left. One party two faces. You just told the story of tweedle dumb and tweedle dumber and nothing more to be said.

    2. randyjet, a few years back they blocked me from voting. My race is white and I am a middle-aged Republican, so I guess I have no real argument about why I was disenfranchised. I just figured my single vote did not mean much anyway. Somebody made a mistake, so I went home without voting. I will show up at the polls tomorrow, hoping they have corrected their mistake and allow me to vote, but if they don’t let me vote, I will not be screaming about race or why the Democrat volunteers won’t let a Republican like me vote.

    1. There will be no Brexit plus due to the large Latino turnout and Trump has himself to blame.

  10. It is too bad that the VA attorney general is not prosecuting the Congressman from TX -22 who voted TWICE in the 2004 election. He voted once in CT and then in VA. Of course, since he is a conservative and a GOPer, such things are forgiven.

    1. Come now. Be Honest. You know the GOP AKA RInos are nothing more than the yip yap puppy dogs of the left bred to cave con command. The right wing . of the left of course. Doesn’t make them centrist nor Right Wing nor Constitutionalists and the term conservative meaning ‘which definition.’ Carville, Lykoff etc have come out with so many it’s meaningless tripe. If they were forgiven it came from The Party and who are you to doubt The Party?

      As for me I don’t serve the Party. I only serve the Constitution in a national political sense. What’s iyour excuse.Whooops sorry asked the wrong person. Have St. James or St. George send me an email.

  11. One last time. This is an American Coronation, not an election. It’s very similar to Halloween where we all dress up as citizens in a democracy and go cast a vote as if we had suffrage. A grand time is generally had by all where they can complain until they are blue in the face – as if it will do any good – and some get frightened out of their wits as is fitting for a Halloween like event. Given that it takes place in the land of televised sports, it’s all dressed up as two teams where every one roots for one side or the other and by the end is quite ready to kill and maim for their team with out a second thought. Then, a hair’s breadth away from all out civil war, an outcome is announced that is either horrifying or truly horrifying; Instantly everyone forgets about killing their brothers and sisters and focuses instead on Tweedledee horror or Tweedledum horror. That’s the surprise element; you never know which it will be (it’s also why it comes so close to Halloween). For those who prefer accuracy over public relations talk, it’s called an American Coronation.

  12. http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37892138 “The FBI says it has found no evidence of criminality in a new batch of Hillary Clinton emails.

    FBI Director James Comey said in a letter to congressmen the agency had finished its review and found nothing to alter its original conclusion.

    In July, he said Mrs Clinton had been careless but not criminal in handling sensitive material on her private email server while secretary of state.

    The issue flared up again with the discovery of new “pertinent” emails.

    They were reportedly found on the laptop of Anthony Weiner, the estranged husband of one of the Democratic presidential candidate’s closest advisers.

    Mr Comey’s original letter late last month to lawmakers, revealing the bureau’s inquiry into Mrs Clinton’s emails had been revived, shook up the White House race and reinvigorated the campaign of Republican nominee Donald Trump.

    It was much ado about nothing, but it certainly amounted to something. While FBI Director James Comey, in effect, said “never mind” with regards to Hillary Clinton’s emails, for the past two weeks the story has dominated the political conversation, and Democrats have paid a price.”

    1. Dave – Wikileaks has found more criminality in the Hillary emails than the FBI.

  13. HOWEVER!!! Look for Blue States to start letting illegal aliens vote in the near future. Some history:

    The right of foreigners to vote in the United States[1][2] has historically been a contentious issue. A foreigner, in this context, is an alien or a person who is not a citizen of the United States.

    Since 1996, a federal law has prohibited non-citizens from voting in federal elections, punishing them by fines, imprisonment, inadmissibility, and deportation.[3][4][5] Exempt from punishment is any non-citizen who “reasonably believed at the time of voting (…) that he or she was a citizen of the United States,” had a parent who is or was a citizen, and began permanently living in the United States before turning 16 years old.[3] The federal law does not prohibit non-citizens from voting in state or local elections, but no state has allowed non-citizens to vote in state elections since Arkansas became the last state to outlaw non-citizen voting in 1926.[6] A few local governments, most of them in Maryland, allow non-citizens to vote in their local elections.

    However, over 40 states or territories, including colonies before the Declaration of Independence, have at some time given at least some aliens voting rights in some or all elections.[7][8][9][10] For example, in 1874, the Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett noted that “citizenship has not in all cases been made a condition precedent to the enjoyment of the right of suffrage. Thus, in Missouri, persons of foreign birth, who have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, may under certain circumstances vote.”[11]

    By 1900, nearly one-half of the states and territories had some experience with voting by aliens, and for some the experience lasted more than half a century.[12] At the turn of the twentieth century, anti-immigration feeling ran very high, and Alabama stopped allowing aliens to vote by way of a constitutional change in 1901; Colorado followed suit in 1902, Wisconsin in 1908, and Oregon in 1914.[13] Just as the nationalism unleashed by the War of 1812 helped to reverse the alien suffrage policies inherited from the late eighteenth century, World War I caused a sweeping retreat from the progressive alien suffrage policies of the late nineteenth century.[14] In 1918, Kansas, Nebraska, and South Dakota all changed their constitutions to purge alien suffrage, and Texas ended the practice of non-citizen voting in primary elections by statute.[13] Indiana and Texas joined the trend in 1921, followed by Mississippi in 1924 and, finally, Arkansas in 1926.[15] In 1931, political scientist Leon Aylsworth noted: “For the first time in over a hundred years, a national election was held in 1928 in which no alien in any state had the right to cast a vote for a candidate for any office – national, state, or local.”[16]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_foreigners_to_vote_in_the_United_States

    Sooo, states have the right to change their own laws about non-citizens voting. Look for it. You will be called racist and xenophobic if you object! And unfair!

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

    1. Squeek

      That is scary. I hope Wiki got that info wrong. The ramifications are too terrible to contemplate.

Comments are closed.