All Episodes
Nov. 13, 2020 - Dennis Prager Show
05:11
Recounts Don't Detect Voter Fraud, They Simply Recount Votes
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
the Heritage Foundation's election law reform initiative.
So I have to admit I'm a bit confused.
And so you'll help me, I'm sure.
So let me review what I asked you.
We talked about the Georgia recount.
There's a 14,000 vote spread.
There are 5 million votes.
4.9 something.
Okay.
So I did a little math.
That comes out to .10.
0.0028% of the vote.
That's a very tiny fraction of the vote.
And I asked you, do you think it is likely that that will be 14,000 or 0.0028% of the vote will be found to have been actually Trump votes or at least non-legal Biden votes?
And you said, no, maybe a few hundred.
So, why are we going through any of this, if that's what you believe?
Well, you're confusing a recount with the issue of whether illegal votes were cast.
Remember, a recount doesn't look whether, for example, the vote was cast by somebody who doesn't actually live in Georgia but is registered there.
It doesn't look at whether somebody who was not a U.S. citizen cast the vote.
Even though it's illegal for them to do.
All a recount does is take all of the ballots that were cast throughout the state by whoever cast them and recount them to make sure they got the math correct and attributed the right number to each of the candidates.
That doesn't tell you whether or not, for example, there was absentee ballot frauds and somebody picked up, you know, 100 votes, 100 absentee ballots here, 1,000 there, filled them out, forged signatures and sent them in.
The ballots, if they came in or were accepted by election officials, are just simply going to be recounted.
All right, you've answered my question.
You've answered my question.
So the recount, unless it's literally a few hundred, I mean, then the recount doesn't reveal fraud.
It only reveals fraud.
So to speak, mistakes.
Correct.
Is fraud even revealable?
Not unless you do the right kind of checking.
And again, I'll give you an example of what I mean.
A couple of years ago, three professors from Virginia actually did a study based on voter survey data after the 2008 election.
And based on that survey data, they estimated that in the 2008 presidential election, 6.4% of the non-citizens who were in the country voted in the election.
Now, that's a felony under federal law.
Somebody who's not a citizen, who's not allowed to register, not allowed to vote.
But there's no verification process.
In Georgia, as in every other state, when you register to vote, They don't actually check to make sure you are a U.S. citizen.
So the only way to be able to check if non-citizens are registered in voting in the state would be to do that kind of investigation or verification process.
And every time there's been any attempt to do anything like that, it gets stopped in the courts.
Georgia actually is one of the few states that passed a law requiring proof of citizenship when you register to vote.
And the left went to court and got court orders saying that they weren't allowed to do that because it was somehow discriminatory.
Wait, so a Georgia court overruled the law?
Yes, a Georgia federal court said that Georgia could not enforce its proof of citizenship required.
On what grounds?
I didn't follow the grounds again.
Oh, they say it's somehow discriminatory to require people to prove they're a U.S. citizen.
Who does it discriminate against?
Well, it's a burden.
You know, the court says it's a burden to make somebody provide that kind of proof.
Right, but who does it discriminate against?
If the burden is equally applied, it's not discriminatory.
A red light discriminates equally.
Dennis, you're preaching to the choir.
I agree 100% with you, but the courts have taken a very, frankly, unfactual, unlegal view of this.
Because they want fraud.
That may very well be.
All right, I have some people with questions.
It's too important to let you go.
Thank you for your time.
Export Selection