TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Only citizens should vote in federal elections according to most speakers. Some believe proof of citizenship should be required for voter registration, while others find it redundant and discriminatory. Voter ID laws are supported by some for ensuring election integrity without disenfranchising legal voters, citing increased turnout in states with such laws.

The scene described is a reaction in a packed room at the Saint Paul Armory following the governor’s signature, which is described as making a “driver’s license for all the law of the land.” The speaker questions whether presenting a driver’s license at the polls would suddenly make those individuals eligible to vote. Mister Lanell responds to the chair, explaining the policy regarding voters whose registration had been incomplete. He states that if such a person presents the election judge with an acceptable identification document, that would clear the challenge from the roster, and they would be permitted to cast a ballot.

A Biden executive order mandates all federal agencies to provide voter registration information to everyone they contact. State election officials cannot require proof of citizenship for those using the federal form. Consequently, non-citizens, such as asylum seekers or foreign students, may receive voter registration forms from government officials and mistakenly believe they must complete them. This leads to unlawful voter registration, and voting by a non-citizen is a deportable criminal offense.

They had a voter ID the size of citizens, like a picture with all their information. It was required to enter the convention, but we don't want voter ID for voting.

I felt compelled to share my experience after working at a polling station for the November 5th election in Iowa. During training, I learned that illegal immigrants can vote using driver's licenses that look identical to those of US citizens. If their citizenship is questioned, they can still vote using a provisional ballot, which is later verified. They have until November 12th to provide proof of citizenship, but documents like utility bills do not confirm citizenship. I'm concerned about the integrity of the voting process and who verifies these provisional ballots. It's crucial for US citizens to be informed and vote responsibly. I encourage everyone to educate themselves and engage in the electoral process. This is about raising awareness of what’s happening. Please keep negative comments to a minimum; I'm sharing this to inform, not to offend.

My friend tried to help her nephew get a driver's license in Pompano Beach, Florida, but they were turned away twice and told to return at 6 am. When they arrived early, they found a large group of Somali illegal immigrants, mostly military-age men, waiting. They were not allowed to film the scene. The speaker criticized the situation and mentioned the ease of obtaining a driver's license for voting purposes. They also blamed Kamala Harris for allowing these people into the country.

I'm Rosemary Jenks from the Immigration Accountability Project. We estimate 30 million non-citizens in the US who can't vote. The Biden administration's order tells federal agencies to offer voter registration to everyone. State officials can't ask for citizenship proof on federal forms. Non-citizens like asylum seekers or foreign students may mistakenly register to vote, risking deportation for voting unlawfully.

Mail-in ballots are problematic, and so is the lack of voter ID requirements. It's baffling that some argue against needing ID to vote, especially since IDs are required for many everyday activities, like getting a driver's license. Recently, Gavin Newsom signed a bill prohibiting inquiries about voter ID status, raising questions about the rationale behind it. At the Democratic National Convention, extensive identification was required for attendees, yet voting—an essential civic duty—does not have the same requirement. Many people, including Democrats, believe voter ID should be mandatory, but some politicians oppose it, possibly to facilitate cheating. Ultimately, it's hard to understand why there would be resistance to ensuring the integrity of the voting process.

They go to the New York City Board of Elections office at 200 Varick Street, 10th Floor, in New York, NY, planning to pose as a non-citizen, Canadian green card holder to see how far they can get in the voter registration process. They note that a clerk initially says you must be a citizen to fill out the registration, but another clerk claims they “accept anything that comes over the counter” and that there are people who have legal situations and registered when they weren’t a citizen. The first clerk’s behavior raises concern: he does not tell them it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that he wouldn’t recommend it. The participants press for clarity. The first clerk admits that “we can’t stop you from submitting the application and if it goes through, but most likely because they don’t do like a full background check,” and adds that “once in a while, you know, we have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom, boom, boom.” The participants quote that as a direct admission that non-citizens are in fact registering to vote. One participant asks if they can fill out the form, and the clerk responds: “Up to you. That’s right. I can’t tell you what to do. You wanna fill that, fill it out. But everything is clear clearly stated, especially at this bottom, it says American citizens.” The participant asks if the clerk would report them; the clerk says “No. No. No. I’m not, no. I’m not that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” The clerk adds that they “accept anything that comes over the counter, you know.” Under New York election law, section 17-106, it is stated that “any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony.” The participants note it would be a criminal offense for the worker to process their voter registration after admitting to being a noncitizen. They ask if they can take materials with them and the clerk confirms they can “take one of these.” The participants are told that they can fill out the form, and if it comes back or doesn’t, they will submit it; the clerk reiterates that they “can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it.” On leaving, they decide not to submit any application, since doing so would be illegal. They later return to gather more information, but the worker becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then changes his stance and refuses to accept the application. They observe that at these centers, there is no requirement to show ID, Social Security, or any proof of identification; all you have to do is sign an affidavit stating you are an American citizen. They describe this as a potential threat to the integrity of the U.S. electoral system. They conclude with the implication that non-citizen registrations have occurred and question how many such forms have been processed.

The video documents an undercover-style investigation at the New York City Board of Elections on the 10th Floor at 200 Varick Street, focusing on whether noncitizens can register to vote. Speaker 0 plans to pose as a noncitizen Canadian green-card holder and attempts to engage a staffer about voter registration. In the first encounter, Speaker 2 tells Speaker 1 that “Everything you fill out, you’re swearing an affidavit that everything you’re putting down is true,” and notes that “you gotta be a citizen to fill it out.” Speaker 1 identifies as “a green card holder from Canada.” The staffer initially signals uncertainty about whether to fill out the form, saying, “I wouldn’t fill it out,” but also suggests the possibility that noncitizens have previously registered. Speaker 0 observes that the staffer does not state it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that the staffer “doesn’t recommend it.” The conversation reveals that the staffer acknowledges noncitizens have registered before: “We have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom boom boom.” The staffer also admits that they “can’t stop you from submitting the application,” and that there is generally no full background check; “we can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it. That’s it.” Speaker 2 reinforces that the staff’s role is to collect and submit, not to verify citizenship, stating, “we accept anything that comes over the counter,” and reiterating that “if it comes back to you, it comes back to… If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.” When Speaker 1 asks if they will report the noncitizen, the staffer responds, “No. No. No. I’m not… that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” Speaker 0 cites New York election law—“Under New York election law, section seventeen one zero six, any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony”—to argue that processing a noncitizen registration would be a criminal offense. After leaving the office, the pair return to request more information, but the staffer becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then refuses to accept their application. The video notes that, according to the staff, “we get registrations come to the mail. We, you know, we whatever comes through, we accept and then it’s submitted,” and emphasizes the absence of ID or proof of citizenship requirements at registration, solely requiring an affidavit asserting citizenship. The segment concludes by highlighting concerns about potential threats to electoral integrity, asserting that there is no requirement to show ID or documentation to register, and that all that is required is signing an affidavit claiming American citizenship.

Governor Tim Wall signed the driver's license for all bill into law, allowing all Minnesotans to obtain a driver's license regardless of immigration status. One speaker stated that instead of changing the politician, the goal is to change the voter. Allowing undocumented immigrants to have an ID is considered un-American, and the speaker believes the intention is to flood the market with illegal voters, given concerns about free and fair elections. The speaker claims this policy will allow millions of people to have an ID. The speaker believes that taxpaying and everyday Americans find this policy disgusting and outrageous, and that policymakers are not listening to the concerns of the public.

Concerns have arisen about noncitizens voting in Arizona's elections, particularly regarding 218,000 voters who were improperly recorded as having provided proof of citizenship. This issue stems from long-time residents who obtained driver's licenses before citizenship requirements were enforced. The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that these individuals are eligible to vote. Addressing the belief that noncitizens are voting in large numbers will be challenging, and it's likely this narrative will continue to surface after the election, regardless of the outcome.

Mail-in ballots pose significant issues. Voter ID requirements are also contentious, with arguments against them often lacking clarity. It's perplexing why some oppose having ID, especially since it's required for many everyday activities, like obtaining a driver's license. Recently, Gavin Newsom signed a bill prohibiting inquiries about voter ID, raising questions about the rationale behind such a decision. In contrast, organizations like the Democratic National Convention require extensive identification for their events. If ID is necessary for various transactions, why not for voting, which is crucial? Many citizens, including Democrats, support voter ID, but some politicians resist it, possibly to maintain opportunities for fraud. Ultimately, the lack of voter ID raises concerns about the integrity of elections.

Speaker 0 explains that under that scenario, someone could get their driver's license again because they register to vote. If the Social Security number doesn’t match, they’re flagged, but as long as they have an ID (the driver’s license) and sign that they’re eligible to vote, they can vote, and they’re no longer flagged. They would be on the system, correct, Mister Lanell. Speaker 1 responds: Madam chair, if I could add, and maybe stepping back from those that are flagged as CID on the roster, for anyone presenting documentation to register to vote, that is an affirmation of their identity. The driver’s license has not been used as proof of citizenship for the purposes of registering to vote—affirming that they are who they say they are. So in any of these cases where someone were to cast a ballot if they were ineligible to vote, there are also reports that are generated post election for voters that are challenged. Counties will run to show status of voters that had been updated due to the fact that they’ve now cast a ballot, and that can be reviewed and referred to the county attorney. Speaker 0 concludes: Okay. So the answer is yes to my question.

It is against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. However, some states are not requiring proof of citizenship when noncitizens register to vote. Governor Glenn Youngkin in Virginia issued an executive order to clean up voting rules. The Biden administration's Department of Justice sued the governor and the Commonwealth of Virginia to try to prevent them from cleaning up their voter rolls. This creates doubt and concern because everyone should want the law to be followed.

The speaker describes a situation in which registration and voting can occur even when a person does not live in the country, citing an example involving a brother in Pakistan to illustrate the point. According to the speaker, there is evidence of two or three other people who are outside the country voting, as well as people residing outside of the district. This is presented as a factual observation about who has voted, including individuals located abroad and not within the local district boundaries. The speaker then critiques the online voter registration system by characterizing it as an honor system. The claim is that anybody can enter information into the online system to register and vote, relying on the promise of truthfulness. The process alleged by the speaker is described as follows: a person would place information into the system and then simply click a box stating that they are not lying about the information provided. After doing so, the person would receive an email from the secretary of state or a similar official channel in the mail, indicating acknowledgment or thanks for registering to vote, effectively confirming their registration. Following this registration, the speaker notes a procedural consequence: once an individual is on the voter rolls, they are mailed a ballot for each election. In other words, the pattern described is that being on the voter rolls automatically leads to receiving a mailed ballot for every election that occurs, according to the speaker’s account of how the system operates. The speaker emphasizes a continuity of this process across elections, implying that the mailed ballot would be a recurring consequence of enrollment on the voter rolls. Throughout the account, there is an emphasis on what the speaker views as the potential vulnerability or problematic nature of the system. The speaker asserts that the combination of an online registration process that relies on an honor system, the possibility of registering with false or unverified information, and the automatic mailing of ballots to those on the rolls creates a situation that the speaker finds problematic. The overall narrative connects the initial observations about individuals voting from abroad and outside the district to a broader critique of the online registration and ballot distribution processes, underscoring concerns about eligibility verification and the integrity of the voting system as described by the speaker.

There are concerns about noncitizens potentially voting in elections due to lack of citizenship verification. Democrats oppose a bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Loopholes exist, allowing noncitizens to vote without consequences. Democrats are accused of exploiting this for political gain. The issue is seen as election interference and a threat to American voters. The conversation highlights the impact of illegal voting on citizens' rights.

Speaker 0 states they can help the individual register when they get their ID. Speaker 1 asserts that an ID does not prove citizenship. Speaker 0 says they moved the individual from citizens in 2013 and that they had IDs in multiple states. The individual acknowledges this.

It is against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. However, some states do not require proof of citizenship when noncitizens register to vote. Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin issued an executive order to clean up the state's voting rules. The Biden-Harris administration Department of Justice sued the governor and the Commonwealth of Virginia to prevent them from cleaning up their voter rolls. This creates doubt and concern in the minds of many Americans.

In California and New York, it is illegal to ask for or show ID when people vote. According to the speakers, there is no logical reason for this law other than to facilitate election fraud. To commit fraud, one would eliminate the need for ID and allow mail-in ballots.

California's online voter registration allows individuals to proceed without providing a driver's license or social security number by checking boxes indicating they don't have them. Contrary to the idea that identification is required for voter registration, this is not being implemented in California. San Francisco and Oakland permit noncitizens to vote. Noncitizen parents in San Francisco can register to vote in the upcoming school board election on November 5, 2024.

The speaker expresses shock at the idea of allowing people to vote without an ID. They mention that some people believe all Indians and Chinese look alike, making it difficult to identify individuals. They argue that anyone could show up and vote, even pretending to be someone else. The speaker believes that having an ID should be a basic requirement for voting and suggests that everyone should be required to provide identification.

I'm pleased with the Supreme Court's quick decision today, which upholds the law regarding noncitizens in Virginia. Thanks to Attorney General Jason Miyares and his team for their excellent work. This ruling clarifies that individuals who self-identify as noncitizens will not be allowed to vote unless they can prove their citizenship. The current voter rolls remain unchanged, and the 1,600 individuals identified as noncitizens will not be reinstated. However, anyone who can attest to their citizenship can register on the same day and cast a provisional ballot. It's crucial for all citizens to participate in this important election, as the future of the country is at stake. I encourage everyone to vote.

You need to fill out paperwork to vote, even without ID or a driver's license. Just provide your name, date, and signature. No registration is required to vote.