July 31 2016
E-Voting machine companies that donated
to Hillary rigged the election for her
Hillary Clinton exceeded exit poll totals in states that had no paper trail to audit the
vote. This is why I am encouraging people to get election day off from work, so they
can conduct exit polls and catch this type of fraud. And all of this fraud happened in
states that used voting machines from companies Hillary had in her back pocket via
the Clinton foundation. This was uncovered in the leaked E-mails.
From caucus99percent.com
From the same people who released the study showing the extraordinarily high
probability that Hillary Clinton exceeded exit polling results in states that had no
paper trail to use to audit the vote, we now get some even more "interesting"
developments.
It seems that Hillary did especially well in which states where the owners of two of
the three companies that make and support e-voting machines, donated to the
Clinton Fund.
Interestingly, much information has recently come to light about the Clinton
candidacy. Notably, the hacker Guccifer 2.0 released documents which he took
from the computer network of the Democratic National Committee. Among these
files, one tabulated a list of big-money donors to the Clinton Foundation. One fact
has gone unreported in the media: Two of the three companies that control the
electronic voting market, namely Dominion Voting and H.I.G. Capital (i.e. Hart
Intercivic), are in this list of big-money donors.
To examine the possibility that the products linked to these companies had been
used to commit electoral fraud, we borrowed the methodology of a paper by
Francois Choquette and James Johnson (C&J). Their paper is based on one of the
basic principles in the biological and social sciences: As the amount of data
increases, the measurement of the average approaches the ‘true’ average. In other
words, as more data is added, the average fluctuates less and less. [...]
You see, these same voting irregularities had been shown to occur in the 2008 and
2012 elections in favor of McCain and Romney, respectively, by the researchers,
Choquette and Johnson. In 2008 and 2012, McCain and Romney" were "financially
interconnected with two of the major electronic voting companies." Both the
companies who donated to the Clinton Foundation share a history of past election
controversies and conviction for white collar crimes.
So, Rodolpho Cortes Barragan, Standford and Axel Geijsel, Tilburg University, used
the same methodology Choquette and Johnson to examine the primary results in
2016. Here's what they found just in Louisana:
When we looked at the results of the Republican primaries, we did not observe that
any candidate kept gaining a larger and larger share of the vote at larger precincts
(meaning the lines were relatively stable as precinct size increased). However, when
we looked at the Democratic primaries, we observed severe abnormalities. Namely,
the share of votes that Hillary Clinton received kept increasing (leading to a
whopping 25%). This type of statistical abnormality is seen in almost every parish
(county). It does not appear in any parish for the Republican primary ...
Funny how no "funny business" ever occurred this year in the Republican
primaries, only the Democratic ones. But I digress ...
In their new study, Barragan and Geijsel didn't look at the exit polling, which was
immediately attacked by many Clinton supporters attacked the use of exit polls
(often with little or no knowledge of statistics) as vaild, such as Ari Bermin in an
attack piece he wrote for The Nation. This time Barragan and Geijsel looked at preelection polls of likely voters, to see what effect the election results varied from
those polls in states with and without a paper trail, on a county by county basis.
Here's what they had to say:
[We uncovered] new information that suggests to a concerted effort to swing the
election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
Specifically, we move beyond comparing the official results to the controversial exit
polls. Instead, we examine a relatively neglected set of numbers: The expected
result based on pre-election polls of likely voters. 337 such polls are listed on the
database provided by Real Clear Politics, representing 139,231 voters across 34
primary states.
We found that while the polls were quite successful at predicting Clinton’s numbers
in states with paper trails (just a statistically inconsequential 1% difference), Clinton
over-performed by an average of 9% in the states that use electronic voting
machines but fail to provide paper evidence of this vote
Here's that result as expressed in a bar graph. The blue bars show what the preelection polls predicted the percentage of votes Hillary would receive versus the
red bars, which show the actual election result for Clinton.
As you can see, in states with no paper trail because the votes were counted on
untraceable e-voting machines, Hillary improved by a whopping nine (9) percent
increase over pre-election polling results for likely voters, whereas in states where
paper trails existed, she only exceeded the pre-election polls by one (1) percent.
Ironic eh, one percent? It's as if someone with a black comedic sensibility was
writing this year's election "script."
http://82.221.129.208/ifyouareinamericayouprobablycantseethisal9.html
Election Fraud Story Gets Worse: Irregularities Tied to EVoting Machine Companies that Donated to Clinton Fund
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 4:42pm — Steven D
From the same people who released the study showing the extraordinarily high probability that Hillary Clinton
exceeded exit polling results in states that had no paper trail to use to audit the vote, we now get some even more
"interesting" developments.
It seems that Hillary did especially well in which states where the owners of two of the three companies that make
and support e-voting machines, donated to the Clinton Fund.
Interestingly, much information has recently come to light about the Clinton candidacy. Notably, the hacker Guccifer
2.0 released documents which he took from the computer network of the Democratic National Committee. Among
these files, one tabulated a list of big-money donors to the Clinton Foundation. One fact has gone unreported in the
media: Two of the three companies that control the electronic voting market, namely Dominion Voting and H.I.G.
Capital (i.e. Hart Intercivic), are in this list of big-money donors.
To examine the possibility that the products linked to these companies had been used to commit electoral fraud, we
borrowed the methodology of a paper by Francois Choquette and James Johnson (C&J). Their paper is based on one of
the basic principles in the biological and social sciences: As the amount of data increases, the measurement of the
average approaches the ‘true’ average. In other words, as more data is added, the average fluctuates less and less.
[...]
You see, these same voting irregularities had been shown to occur in the 2008 and 2012 elections in favor of McCain
and Romney, respectively, by the researchers, Choquette and Johnson. In 2008 and 2012, McCain and Romney" were
"financially interconnected with two of the major electronic voting companies." Both the companies who donated to
the Clinton Foundation share a history of past election controversies and conviction for white collar crimes.
So, Rodolpho Cortes Barragan, Standford and Axel Geijsel, Tilburg University, used the same methodology Choquette
and Johnson to examine the primary results in 2016. Here's what they found just in Louisana:
When we looked at the results of the Republican primaries, we did not observe that any candidate kept gaining a
larger and larger share of the vote at larger precincts (meaning the lines were relatively stable as precinct size
increased). However, when we looked at the Democratic primaries, we observed severe abnormalities. Namely, the
share of votes that Hillary Clinton received kept increasing (leading to a whopping 25%). This type of statistical
abnormality is seen in almost every parish (county). It does not appear in any parish for the Republican primary ...
Funny how no "funny business" ever occurred this year in the Republican primaries, only the Democratic ones. But I
digress ...
In their new study, Barragan and Geijsel didn't look at the exit polling, which was immediately attacked by many
Clinton supporters attacked the use of exit polls (often with little or no knowledge of statistics) as vaild, such as Ari
Bermin in an attack piece he wrote for The Nation. This time Barragan and Geijsel looked at pre-election polls of likely
voters, to see what effect the election results varied from those polls in states with and without a paper trail, on a
county by county basis. Here's what they had to say:
[We uncovered] new information that suggests to a concerted effort to swing the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
Specifically, we move beyond comparing the official results to the controversial exit polls. Instead, we examine a
relatively neglected set of numbers: The expected result based on pre-election polls of likely voters. 337 such polls
are listed on the database provided by Real Clear Politics, representing 139,231 voters across 34 primary states.
We found that while the polls were quite successful at predicting Clinton’s numbers in states with paper trails (just a
statistically inconsequential 1% difference), Clinton over-performed by an average of 9% in the states that use
electronic voting machines but fail to provide paper evidence of this vote
Heer's that result as expressed in a bar graph. The blue bars show what the pre-election polls predicted the
percentage of votes Hillary would receive versus the red bars, which show the actual election result for Clinton.
As you can see, in states with no paper trail because the votes were counted on untraceable e-voting machines,
Hillary improved by a whopping nine (9) percent increase over pre-election polling results for likely voters, whereas in
states where paper trails existed, she only exceeded the pre-election polls by one (1) percent. Ironic eh, one percent?
It's as if someone with a black comedic sensibility was writing this year's election "script."
In an ironic twist of fate, the basis if electronic voting machines being used to steal an election was actually reported
in this 2004 article in The Nation, when they feared the Democratic Presidential nominee, John Kerry, would lose
because of Republican manipulation of our votes. Now, however, that the Democratic Party Establishment candidate
stands accused of benefiting from the same electronic voting machine that cannot be audited, they sing a different
tune. No rigged election this time, despite numerousstudies that have demonstrated votes have likely been
manipulated by these exact same machines, whether comparing final voting results to exit polls or pre-election polls.
Here's Baragan & Geigsel's understated response to this result:
Thus, pollsters were quite accurate in predicting the outcome, but only in states where fraud is hardest to hide. This
situation is completely flipped in the states where the placed vote cannot be verified, as the vote only ever existed in
the machines. [...]
Why would voters in larger precincts favor one candidate over the other by such a wide margin? We have been unable
to come up with a reasonable psychological or sociological reason that would apply only to voters voting in the
Democratic primary.
In conclusion, the data suggests that Clinton won in counties and in states where Clinton Foundation donors are
responsible for the voting machines. Thus, we strongly believe that the risk posed by unverifiable electronic voting
should not be taken. Our country should go back to verifiable voting. An honest election is more important than a day
of labor.
Cue the Correct the Record and Hillary supporters (or hired trolls) CT whiners in one, two, three ...
Tags:
#ElectionFrauud #EvotingMachines #ClintonFoundation
Vote
up
88 users have voted.

caucus99percent blog

Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 4:45pm — Steven D
Yes, use of statistics
to examine strange anomalies is election results is definitive proof that you are a conspiracy theorist.
up
53 users have voted.
—
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:33pm — ngant17
it's well-known statistically that as the data set increases
the variances of the average tend to stabilize or reach a 'steady state'.
That's why only a minimum sample size from a population is needed, and above that, it's just unnecessary to take
more samples. Random and independent sampling is sufficient and necessary to get an understanding of the big
picture.
Bayes in England began the idea of reasoning with probability in 1763 in England. We've had almost two and a half
centuries of advances in statistical science. Dutch sociologist Marcel van Dam is credited with creating exit polling in
the Netherlands in 1967. It's proven it's worth all over the world and only a few mindless shills in the US will try to
make up silly arguments against it.
Of course, hand counting is an additional way of verifying votes. Canada hand-counts all the millions of votes in about
four hours. None of our critics, these fraud-deniers, ever dare to bring up this forbidden subject in official elections.
up
40 users have voted.
—
http://tinyurl.com/my-bernie-bird
http://tinyurl.com/my-bernie-bird2
http://tinyurl.com/nathan-signature1

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:27pm — HappyinNM
Exactly!
Exit polls were used for years in this country, as well as many countries around the world. They were amazingly
accurate. That was until Karl Rove started screwing with the votes. The media used to do the exit polling, but stopped
when they proved to be inaccurate. The media bought the excuse, and stopped doing exit polling. When we repeal the
2nd Amendment, we ought to throw in the press protection in the 1st Amendment. They're not doing their jobs, and
haven't for years.
up
22 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:10am — Alphalop
When did being a Conspiracy Theorist become equivalent to
Stupidity or wackjobbery?
Sure there are both, but there ARE conspiracies out there and of course they are ALL theory until proven.
Gravity is just a conspiracy theory to keep us down man.....
up
8 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." Me

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 4:58pm — on the cusp
They will flip for her in the general against Trump.
We are just screwed.
up
21 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:29pm — HappyinNM
It depends on how much Trump is willing
to schtup them. They dance for the most money.
up
11 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 8:55pm — lunachickie
He's got a big payday coming, IMO
one way or another.
up
11 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:06pm — tourniquet
i almost wish
someone had thought to confiscate and sequester a few random machines from these states with no paper trail.
surely someone could tear the code apart before the election.
i'm sure it's probably too late now, because there's no way they'd allow such a hack to exist any longer than
necessary.
up
23 users have voted.
—
GIANT ALL-CAPS SIG

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 10:28pm — tle
I wish they'd all been destroyed, too late to be replaced.
And all the voting company computers and storage. If I thought I could have pulled it off, it would have been worth
going to jail for it.
What I really wonder is why Anonymous hasn't worked at hacking the vote. Or maybe they tried, and were sent to
some East European gulag for it. Or to an anonymous grave.
Vote on paper, count by hand. It ain't that hard.
up
14 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:12am — Alphalop
I would love to see them hack the general so that
Mickey Mouse or some other fictitious character is the winner.
Maybe that would get our short attention span having fellow citizens to finally pay attention to the crap that is
happening.
up
3 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." Me

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:08pm — tourniquet
for that matter,
does anyone know if voting machines are connected to any sort of net? or do they just store votes on media?
up
8 users have voted.
—
GIANT ALL-CAPS SIG

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:47pm — ngant17
machines are given 'patches' during Tuesday elections
US voting equipment is usually networked. Votes are often sent thru mysterious IP networks off-site for "processing".
Executable code can be made with a built-in timer to self-destruct or erase itself automatically. So it would be hard to
find how the votes were being shifted or stolen inside the black boxes.
up
35 users have voted.
—
http://tinyurl.com/my-bernie-bird
http://tinyurl.com/my-bernie-bird2
http://tinyurl.com/nathan-signature1

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:26pm — duckpin
Thanks for this; it's important information
During the 10 months I frequented TMMMT, I noted that each and every time someone brought up facts like these,
that person was villified as engaging in conspiracy theory. No one offered an explanation for the anomalies but
directed a personal attack.
This is that type of data that calls out for more investigation and points to the areas where the investigations should
be concentrated.
up
28 users have voted.
—
"Sometimes I feel like Fletcher Christian..."

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 7:02pm — on the cusp
Call me a dumb ass, but what is
"LOP" and "TMMMT"? I am out of the acronym loop.
up
6 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 8:48pm — polkageist
Some others of us are out of that loop too.
There is a website http://www.acronymfinder.com that helps.
Unfortunately some C99 users are addicted to acronyms and even make up their own from time to time. No help for
these. I complain when the frustration gets too much but am always answered with "if you were typing on a [small
device of some kind] you would use acronyms too." I just ignore the damn things because if I can't get it from context
I figure it's not important. At least not to me. Thus, acronyms make me a difficult person.
up
8 users have voted.
—
Greed is not a virtue.
Socialism: the radical idea of sharing.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 9:04pm — lunachickie
Google comes up with some ugly possibilities
I wish the OC would clarify this, please.
up
4 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:15am — Alphalop
Well, in my case LOP = Lazy Overweight Police... ;)
but if you meant TOP and it was a typo that is "The Other Place" aka "The Great Orange Satan".
up
2 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." Me

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:38pm — Lily O Lady
In my state it is not permitted to take a photo of your
voting machine screen.
up
23 users have voted.
—
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you
begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:01pm — duckpin
Wow! just Wow
up
14 users have voted.
—
"Sometimes I feel like Fletcher Christian..."

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:25pm — Lily O Lady
I know, right?
up
14 users have voted.
—
"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you
begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:40pm — Shockwave
Two more data points
UNCOUNTED: The True Story of the California Primary
Lawsuit Just Filed To STOP Certification Of CA Primary Election!
up
23 users have voted.
—
The political revolution continues

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 5:54pm — GreyWolf
just wanted to make sure that you, Steven, saw this
Hillary's Closest Aide Admits Clinton 'Illegally' Burned Daily Schedule
As we concluded previously, so we learn now that not only did Clinton omit key emails to the government, and often
times the official schedule omitted - if not outright "redacted" - key names and events as well while Clinton was the
Secretary of State, she further "burned" other schedules entirely. Ironically, just as the case was with Abedin
submitted an email that Hillary chose to keep from the government, the daily planning schedules from Hillary's aides
now shines a light on the detail Clinton tried to keep from the public record once again.
Just more of the destroying government records that is the SOP of HRC (Hiding Real Conspiracies).
up
34 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:02pm — CaptainPoptart
The only reason to machine count votes
Is ostensibly to get the results more quickly. Who benefits beside the media that wants to tell an instant story? Why
do we need the results in less than four hours as in Canada, or even four days for that matter? Depending on the
election the winner is not sworn in for weeks - the first of the following year at the earliest. So what is the rush?
Paper ballots are the one sure way to ensure accurate counting of results. Is accuracy not more important than
speed? This issue is even more important than big money in politics because even if we reduce the money in
elections, what good does it do us if we can't get an accurate count of the votes?
up
33 users have voted.
—
I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance. - e.e.cummings

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:15pm — riverlover
There are now many of us forced-out retirees
who would be glad to oversee or even count paper ballots. Counting, if there are multiple referenda, candidate levels,
etc, I have no idea if they are counted one level at a time. Optical scanning with retained paper ballots would be fine
IF chain of custody of the scanners to tabulators were done with no internet connection and statistical sampling. How
does Canada do it? Or could there be wiggle room there?
up
21 users have voted.
—
Americans, while occasionally willing to be serfs, have always been obstinate about being peasantry. F. Scott
Fitzgerald, the Great Gatsby-----I was an optimist, we all toil for the manor.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 7:12pm — Deja
Alex told us about Bolivia's vote counting (EXCELLENT!)
I'll have to go find it, but they have a 4th branch of government for strictly elections.
Paper ballots are counted on location, in public, by citizens drawn by lottery.
It is nearly scam proof. Although, I wonder if they've ever dealt with someone like Medusa?
Edit: hope link to actual comment works
http://caucus99percent.com/comment/120803#comment-120803
up
23 users have voted.
—
"The gatekeepers must change."
Prince

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 7:52pm — CaptainPoptart
Thanks for the link, wasn't aware of this excellent methodology
And I'll bet Bolivia's system costs less than ours to boot.
up
14 users have voted.
—
I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance. - e.e.cummings

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 8:33pm — MonetaryLeviathon
must be the reason
why it is rumored that the US government is interested in overthrowing the 'evil dictator' Evo Morales in Bolivia... fair
elections ... those uppity south American countries exercising democracy like Chile in 1973 before Pinochet and his
death squads were installed into power.
up
1 user has voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:41pm — HappyinNM
It depends on the machine.
Some are completely electronic, and there's nothing to count. Some have tabulators that tabulate the paper ballots.
They're handy for announcing winners quickly. If there's a question about the vote, paper ballots can be manually
counted. Those damn electronic machines are the problem, and lots of states bought them with the HAVA funds. NM
bought and used them in the 2004 election. The vote was so questionable, they were replaced by the next election. If
you look at results in NM during presidential years, 2004 was the only year we voted Repuke since 2000. Funny, huh?
up
13 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 6:49pm — Deja
Wondering if Medusa will win Tx this year
Stranger things have happened. I guess. I'll want a bunker if she does. This place will go fucking nuts. Secession will
be eminent. I swear if she pulls this shit in the general too, I'm going to do my best to leave the country.
up
9 users have voted.
—
"The gatekeepers must change."
Prince

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 7:40pm — CaptainPoptart
Hate to sound like a luddite
But why even use machines for tabulating. I mean what is the gd hurry to announce winners quickly? I get it that the
ballots can be manually counted if there is a problem, but why wait till there is a problem? I mean who decides if
there is a problem? I'm advocating for 100% manual counting with automatic recounts within a certain margin TBD by
law. Seems the example of NM means one election was probably stolen and one election is too many.
up
17 users have voted.
—
I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance. - e.e.cummings

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 8:34am — Christine.MI
To please the
MASTERS, of course!
up
4 users have voted.
—
Bernie-because f*ck this sh*t!

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:22am — Alphalop
1000% agreement on this, Accuracy is more important than speed
particularly with something so important.
I don't care if it takes a month to get the results, I want them to be fucking HONEST!
One can't help but wonder how much more they can pile on before the whole situation explodes into mass unrest.
I think it may be much closer than many would think.
up
6 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." Me

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 7:05pm — on the cusp
uh...media? Ratings?
up
5 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 7:26pm — riverlover
Of course. Exceptional USA does instantaneous counts
even before polls are closed winners are announced without exit polling. What could go wrong? Ya think USA Today
will ever show the multiple layers of scam? Any MSM?
up
10 users have voted.
—
Americans, while occasionally willing to be serfs, have always been obstinate about being peasantry. F. Scott
Fitzgerald, the Great Gatsby-----I was an optimist, we all toil for the manor.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:24am — Alphalop
Apparently we have gotten so good at vote counting that we
can actually call the race before the single largest state in the whole damn nation has even voted.
That right there should show what a farce this election, and our political process in general, and the media has
become.
up
4 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." Me

Log in or register to post comments
Sat, 07/09/2016 - 4:20pm — Ellen North
Lol, liars always like to get
Lol, liars always like to get their story in fast and first, with a natural disregard for the facts. The Big Lie works, when
reality must be denied, as when by those who count the votes and record the numbers.
up
0 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 8:00pm — Nearlynecessary
How much graft does it take to get the MSM to pay attention?
I mean really, you would think most people in this country and especially voters, no matter who they vote for, would
want their votes to be counted! I am truly ashamed of what this country has become. The only term for this is a
COUP!
I'm so disgusted, if I could leave this country I would.
up
14 users have voted.
—
Any stained glass afficionados? Please check out my website: www.masterpieceglass.net

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 8:12pm — Nearlynecessary
I just feel so damn HELPLESS
Like a mute person witnessing an atrocity, that cannot signal for help. I appreciate your essays, Steven. You have a
gift and a powerful voice. Keep up the good work and maybe, just maybe there will come a tipping point, when
average Americans pay attention to the theft going on right in front of them, and GET PISSED about it!!
This lying, colluding, conspiring, CRIMINAL asshole can not be allowed to become president!
up
19 users have voted.
—
Any stained glass afficionados? Please check out my website: www.masterpieceglass.net

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 11:17pm — Thaumlord-Exelbirth
Like a mute
without use of arms to even dial a phone for help.
up
6 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 10:44pm — LoneStarMike
Election Fraud - It's a Crying Shame
up
7 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 11:14pm — Thaumlord-Exelbirth
COINCIDENCE!
Correlation doesn't equal causation!
There's no evidence!
You're a Trump enabling, sore loser, Berniebro!
You're a neanderthal sexist woman hater!
Satan-Hitler will reign supreme because of you!
Am I convincing enough, or was the Satan-Hitler not over the top enough?
up
11 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:27am — Alphalop
Was so spot on I got GOS Flashbacks. ;)
I'm still traumatized, lol!
up
4 users have voted.
—
"I used to vote Republican, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." Me

Log in or register to post comments
Mon, 07/04/2016 - 11:58pm — Joanne Leon
Is there one place
preferably a web site, where all the voting irregularity information is compiled in an organized way? Somebody asked
me for that a week or so ago and I looked at Sane Progressive's blogspot but it wasn't very helpful. Required sifting
thru a whole bunch of her blog posts and videos and looked more like a promo for her channel. I'd like to be able to
send a link out if anybody has done the work compiling it.
up
9 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 9:11am — Steven D
Richard Charnin's site has a lot of links
though I'm not sure how comprehensive a list it is.
https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/
The problem that always gets raised when you refer to Charnin, however, is that he beleives the JFK assassination
resulted from a conspiracy. I don't believe he is alone in that belief, but it is always used by the anti-election fraud
people to attack his credibility.
Nonetheless, the links he provides are useful. But you may need to dig for a lot of his blog posts to get to them. I
don't think he has an archive that has all the links to other people's studies. Here is the link to his own blog post
archive:https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/my-website/
up
4 users have voted.
—
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 3:45pm — lotlizard
In the '70s it was pretty obvious the Warren Commission was b.s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_As...
The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) was established in 1976 to
investigate the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. The HSCA completed its investigation in
1978 and issued its final report the following year, concluding that Kennedy was probably assassinated as a
result of a conspiracy.
I notice that over the years even this Wikipedia article has been subject to twist and spin. More and more statements
have been inserted that appear to bolster the Warren Commission, that is, they appear to support the
exact opposite of the select committee’s express conclusion.
up
2 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 12:11am — ZimInSeattle
#ITrustHillary committed election fraud.
Who are you going to believe: us, or your lying eyes? That’s the good word from Democratic Party powers that be and
their transcribers in the corporate media, in response to the “allegations” by Bernie Sanders supporters that the
nomination was stolen by Hillary Clinton.
I used scare quotes around the word “allegations” because the truth is plain to see and undeniable by
anyone with a microgram of honesty: Hillary Clinton cheated. If the rules had been followed, Bernie
Sanders would be the nominee.
As with all things Clinton, of course, definitions matter. It depends on what the meaning of “cheat” is.
To most people, “cheating” means breaking the rules of a contest. By this standard definition, there’s no doubt that
the Clinton campaign, its political allies and the Democratic National Committee cheated in favor of Clinton and
against Sanders. They broke the law. They disenfranchised voters. They broke party rules. And they violated longstanding customs that are so widely accepted that they are essentially de facto rules of the Democratic Party and the
American political system.
Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, ran a clean campaign.
Emphasis added. More at this link: Hillary Cheated
#JillNotHill #BernieOrBust
up
16 users have voted.
—
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - JFK

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 2:07am — NotGeorgeWill
A couple items with respect to North Carolina and VA.
1. I continue to see the claims by these authors that Virginia doesn't have "paper ballots and a paper trial". This claim
is just false -- it's based on the machines that were in use in the 2014 election cycle.
There may be jurisdictions where they are still in use, but most of the large and most populous counties transitioned
over to paper ballots/scantrons in the spring primary (e.g. the transition was prompted by security concerns over the
old touch screen systems). If someone wanted to do an audit, there is a paper trail.
2. They talk about the two as "sister" states. Maybe things look that way for someone who is just looking at one
variable (e.g. racial composition), but it's not accurate. Take median income. In North Carolina it's $46,000. In
Virginia it's $62,000. That's a big difference.
Also keep in mind, some of the richest, and most consistently Democratic counties in America are in Northern Virginia.
The Democrats in these counties are much more similar to voters in Maryland's DC suburbs than those in North
Carolina. e.g. this is the heart of the political establishment. It's pretty incredible that Sanders even got one-third of
the vote.
In the case of advertising, I don't think Sanders actually spent any money in Virginia. Clinton spent at least $500K on
ads. However, he did spend money in North Carolina, probably outspent Clinton.
The most consistent variables that predict a Sanders/Clinton voter are age, income and race. In that order. The areas
of Virginia outside the Beltway may have more in common with North Carolina, but that Beltway area is one-quarter
of the state's population, and a huge part of the Democratic vote share.
I can't speak to every state -- in the case of Puerto Rico, the vote was clearly rigged in the most ham-fisted way. New
York City's vote definitely looks like it was gamed. However, in the case of Virginia and North Carolina, I don't find the
"election fraud" argument persuasive.
up
1 user has voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 3:36am — CalvinV
The pattern of voting machine fraud
is identical to what happened in Kansas and is being sued:
"Wichita State University statistician Beth Clarkson had been pursuing the case herself, but now has a Wichita lawyer
representing her. Other people have set up a non-profit foundation for donations.
A Sedgwick County judge is expected to set filing deadlines and a trial date at a Monday hearing.
Clarkson has analyzed election returns in Kansas and elsewhere over several elections that indicate "a statistically
significant" pattern where the percentage of Republican votes increase the larger the size of the
precinct. The pattern could indicate election fraud."
A guess for the fraud algorithm is that the machines count the votes normally when there are few votes so all testing
will not show any anomaly. However, when the number of votes is getting heavy then it will start to miscount.
In a way, it's rather like the Volkswagen emission cheat. The software was designed to figure out whether the car was
really idling or just throttling under a test or it's being run for real and behaves differently to give either less emission
or more power.
up
5 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 6:34am — DonMidwest
Ongoing covering of election fraud at TheProgressiveWing.com
This is the new web site developed by LieparDestin of the BNR daily articles on DK/TOP/orange crap
title of article
CA Election Update Tue 7-5-2016 – 50+ Links – DAY 28 AFTER California’s Election Day – 287,782 voters
ballots not counted – 2 Election Lawsuits- w/ potential National Ramifications still alive
CA Election Update Tue 7-5-2016 – 50+ Links – DAY 28 AFTER California’s Election Day – 287,782 voters ballots not
counted – 2 Election Lawsuits- w/ potential National Ramifications still alive
As you can see the focus is on CA.
This is a series posted by CA Democrat and each one has an ongoing set of links
They link a lot to trustvote.com an election integrity effort in CA
Very interesting that the coverage here at C99% and at theprogressivewing on election integrity is excellent. On
TOP/DK/? they are in denial, conspiracy theory, etc. on this whole issue.
up
5 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 7:13am — DonMidwest
The OH group and RICO suit
The actors from Central Ohio include
Bob Fitrakis, an atty, college prof, head of Green party in OH, author of 6 books on elections, editor of Columbus Free
Press - a publication mostly now on line that has been going since the 1970's
Cliff Arnebeck, an atty, spent a long time in DC, has been litigating elections since 2000, for many years trying to put
Karl Rove in jail for throwing elections
Harvey Wasserman, anti nuclear activist for 50 years, teaches at same college as Bob F., historian, co author of
recent book with Bob.
Bob and Cliff have made trips to CA to work with the group there with Lori Grace
The videos of Bob and Cliff were shot at meetings in CA. The leader, Lori Grace, and their main web page is
trustvote.org
A patchwork of Cliff saying that a RICO suit is being filed in OH (racketeering) and will have national implications as
well. Also, the entire election was thrown.
Election Protection Lawsuit (in just under 7 minutes)
This is a 14 min video of Lori Grace (from CA), Bob and Cliff talking about election issues. A content video and a get to
know the actors video.
Lori Grace, Bob FItrakis, Cliff Arnebeck - Legal Team
This is from a 2+ hour meeting on May 29, 2016 in which Lori, Bob and Cliff talk about a suit even before the CA
Primary. The suit was not filed because Cliff sent a letter to voting machine makers that they were on notice, and the
exit polls in CA and NJ were cancelled. This effort had to hire professional exit poll people to do a sample exit polls in
both states and this is one of the main reasons that the suits have been delayed -- May 29, 2016
Protecting Our Elections
And another video up on trustvote.org with Lori, Bob and Cliff again posted on June 16, 2016 when Bob and Cliff were
in CA again
Protecting Our Elections (first night) UPDATED
The video was filmed on July 1 and is from trustvote.org and is now on the top of the page
The 2016 California Primary: A Disturbing Situation
I have noted before, but it is worth repeating, that I live in a suburb of Columbus, OH. Bob lives in a big house and
Bob and Cliff have their legal offices in the house and they hold a monthly salon. I have been going there for a couple
of years and trust what they say. I have several books from their operation and slogged through a couple of them, but
it wasn't until I watched the 1 1/2 hour video pointed out by Steve D that I was sure that elections have been stolen.
Talking to Bob about it, he says that on one hand, elections are simple, just counting. On the other hand with 8,000
local jurisdictions and 50 states and secret software, and voting machines owned by right wing Christians in OH, but
private ownership in many states, unaudited systems, etc. and being inclined to believe them because of the
experience of 2004 in Ohio bringing snacks to mostly black voters standing in the rain to vote many hours after polls
closed, ... even I had not gone to the other side. Elections are being stolen in the US.
I had not gone to the other side until I watched the HBO movie on line recommended by Steven D right here. A
reminder it is,
Hacking Democracy - Full Documentary
I know this comment is too long - but I wanted to get it out because here is a legal assist to Cliff saying that Bernie
actually won the primary. She doesn't provide the details. But I trust that after working for well over a decade on this
issue and knowing that politicians, media, etc. are in denial about election fraud, without a strong case they would be
trounced. They told John Kerry that the election in OH in 2004 was stolen and he didn't follow up on it. Here is the
video from Cliff's assistant posted June 30, 2016
Bernie Sanders actually won Nationwide by 15% . Lawsuit update
up
10 users have voted.

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 8:54am — MsGrin
http://justiceserved.org/
She names this site in the video
up
3 users have voted.
—
Love trumps hate!
Bernie Sanders 2/27/16

Log in or register to post comments
Tue, 07/05/2016 - 8:53pm — Damnit Janet
still not able to register.... case pending
Fuck Hillary. Fuck Trump.
Fuck American "elections".
up
4 users have voted.
—
"Love One Another" ~ George Harrison

Log in or register to post comments
http://www.caucus99percent.com/content/election-fraud-story-gets-worse-irregularities-tied-e-voting-machinecompanies-donated
Activism, News, Uncategorized, Voter Registration, Voter Suppression
Study shows voting irregularities linked to companies that
donated to the Clinton Foundation
Posted by
Rodolfo Cortes Barragan
3 weeks ago






5.68k
73
7
Voting irregularities linked to companies that donated to the Clinton Foundation.
By Axel Geijsel, Tilburg University & Rodolfo Cortes Barragan, Stanford University
“There is no reason to trust insiders in the elections industry.”- Jimmy Carter, 39th U.S. President
Today is the Fourth of July. Millions of Americans are celebrating independence from an Empire that refused to allow our forefathers
equal representation in its legislature. We Americans like to believe that in this day and age, we have reached the apex of democracy.
Yet, throughout the history of the our nation, millions of people have struggled and fought to have their voices heard and their votes
counted. In light of our history of disenfranchisement, where do we stand today? Are all of us heard and represented equally? Or are
some more equal than others?
A few weeks ago, we reported that in her contest against Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton won
by a much larger margin in states that do not have a paper trail to the placed votes. We suggested that a targeted electronic drain of
Sanders votes may have taken place in these states, as it is there that vote manipulation is easiest to hide. In this new study, we
uncover new information that suggests to a concerted effort to swing the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
Specifically, we move beyond comparing the official results to the controversial exit polls. Instead, we examine a relatively neglected
set of numbers: The expected result based on pre-election polls of likely voters. 337 such polls are listed on the database provided by
Real Clear Politics, representing 139,231 voters across 34 primary states.
We found that while the polls were quite successful at predicting Clinton’s numbers in states with paper trails (just a statistically
inconsequential 1% difference), Clinton over-performed by an average of 9% in the states that use electronic voting machines but fail
to provide paper evidence of this vote:
Thus, pollsters were quite accurate in predicting the outcome, but only in states where fraud is hardest to hide. This situation is
completely flipped in the states where the placed vote cannot be verified, as the vote only ever existed in the machines.
It is quite possible that the vote in these states was, in fact, manipulated. Studies conducted by teams of computer scientists at
Princeton, NYU, and UCSD show that the machines from all major companies, such as the AVC Advantage made by Sequoia (now
owned by Dominion), have severe security issues and are very vulnerable to network viruses. Despite this fact, there is very little state
or federal regulation of the machines, and regulations regarding intellectual property have often prevented independent research.
Apart from the security problems, many researchers have posited that the biggest danger does not come from the outside, but from the
inside. Most of the election companies have been mired in controversy, both in terms of conflicts of interest and having been
convicted of white collar crime.
The companies have done very little to dispel the controversies, and even added fuel to the fire. For example, in 2003, Walden O’Dell,
CEO of Diebold and a top fundraiser for George W. Bush, wrote in one of his fundraising pitches to the Republicans that they were
“committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President.”
Additionally, in 2008 and 2012 two major candidates, McCain and Romney, were not only financially interconnected with two of the
major electronic voting companies, but they were also shown to benefit from severe statistical irregularities in voting patterns. One
could ask whether these same patterns are also found in the 2016 primary election.
Interestingly, much information has recently come to light about the Clinton candidacy. Notably, the hacker Guccifer 2.0 released
documents which he took from the computer network of the Democratic National Committee. Among these files, one tabulated a list
of big-money donors to the Clinton Foundation. One fact has gone unreported in the media: Two of the three companies that control
the electronic voting market, namely Dominion Voting and H.I.G. Capital (i.e. Hart Intercivic), are in this list of big-money donors.
To examine the possibility that the products linked to these companies had been used to commit electoral fraud, we borrowed the
methodology of a paper by Francois Choquette and James Johnson (C&J). Their paper is based on one of the basic principles in the
biological and social sciences: As the amount of data increases, the measurement of the average approaches the ‘true’ average. In
other words, as more data is added, the average fluctuates less and less.
What C&J found is that, both in the 2008 and 2012 cycles, this basic principle was violated only in the case of pro-corporate
candidates. McCain and Romney kept gaining a greater and greater share of the vote at large precincts, while non-corporate candidates
did not. The explanation C&J provide is that if one person (or multiple people) would aim to hack the vote, they may choose to do it
primarily where they can have the most influence and where the fraud would also be the easiest to hide. Essentially, they would hack
the bigger precincts.
Using the method described by C&J, we analyzed the Democratic and Republican primaries for Louisiana. The reason why we picked
this state is because of the strong discrepancy between the likely voter intent and the reported results (which was 12% in favor for
Clinton), because of the fact that their statewide data is readily downloadable, and, finally, because each precinct in this state used the
same type of electronic voting machine.
When we looked at the results of the Republican primaries, we did not observe that any candidate kept gaining a larger and larger
share of the vote at larger precincts (meaning the lines were relatively stable as precinct size increased). However, when we looked at
the Democratic primaries, we observed severe abnormalities. Namely, the share of votes that Hillary Clinton received kept increasing
(leading to a whopping 25%). This type of statistical abnormality is seen in almost every parish (county). It does not appear in any
parish for the Republican primary:
As such, in Louisiana, a state with solely electronic voting, Sen. Sanders is the only candidate in either party to face an overwhelming
disadvantage at larger precincts. Again, this does not simply reflect an urban vs. rural distinction. There are large precincts in small
towns and small precincts in big cities.
Why would voters in larger precincts favor one candidate over the other by such a wide margin? We have been unable to come up
with a reasonable psychological or sociological reason that would apply only to voters voting in the Democratic primary.
In conclusion, the data suggests that Clinton won in counties and in states where Clinton Foundation donors are responsible for the
voting machines. Thus, we strongly believe that the risk posed by unverifiable electronic voting should not be taken. Our country
should go back to verifiable voting. An honest election is more important than a day of labor.
We can return to our initial question: Is everyone represented equally in our country? As President Jimmy Carter has written, and as
Harvard research has shown, the U.S. has turned into an oligarchy. The votes of the rich seem to weigh more than the votes of the
poor. Is this the country we want to leave for our children?
Note: Additional analyses and a response to the critics of our initial report can be found in our Appendix. Lastly, we are both full-time
students (with big loans) who are working part-time while doing this research (much more is to come). If you are able to help us in
our effort, please visit our GoFundMe. Thank you.
Tags: Stanford Study
About Rodolfo Cortes Barragan
Rodolfo is a doctoral candidate in Psychology at Stanford University. His award-winning research has been featured in
major outlets, such as the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America and the
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin.
Comments Closed
Comments are closed. You will not be able to post a comment in this post.
http://thebernreport.com/study-shows-voting-irregularities-linked-to-companies-that-donated-to-the-clintonfoundation/
POLITICS : LAW
Did E-Vote Firm Patch Election?
Kim Zetter
10.13.03
Diebold Election Systems has had a tumultuous year, and it doesn't
look like it's getting any better.
Last January the electronic voting machine maker faced public
embarrassment when voting activists revealed the company's insecure
FTP server was making its software source code available for everyone
to see.
Then researchers and auditors who examined code for the company's
touch-screen voting system released two separate reports stating that
the software was full of serious security flaws.
Now a former worker in Diebold's Georgia warehouse says the company
installed patches on its machines before the state's 2002 gubernatorial
election that were never certified by independent testing authorities or
cleared with Georgia election officials.
If the charges are true, Diebold could be in violation of federal and state
election-certification rules. The charges also raise questions about the
integrity of the Georgia election results and any other election that uses
patched Diebold systems that have not been re-certified.
According to Rob Behler, an engineer hired as a contractor to work in
Diebold's Georgia warehouse last year, the Diebold systems had major
functioning problems.
Behler said 25 to 30 percent of the machines in one shipment to the
warehouse either crashed upon booting or had problems with their realtime clocks, causing the systems to register the date inaccurately then
boot improperly or freeze up altogether.
"They did not meet what I would deem standard operation," he said.
Behler said Diebold provided warehouse workers with at least three
patches to apply to the systems before state officials began logic and
accuracy testing on them. Behler said one patch was applied to
machines when he came to the warehouse in June, a second patch was
applied in July and a third in August after he left the warehouse.
Behler first informed Bev Harris, owner of the BlackBox Voting site, of
the situation. Harris has spent a year investigating problems with
electronic voting systems, and is the author of a forthcoming book on
the technology. She said the practice of patching systems after they've
been certified opens the possibility for anyone -- from Diebold
employees to local election officials -- to install malicious code on a
machine that could alter election results and then delete itself to avoid
detection.
According to Harris, this scenario is particularly worrisome in light of
what happened in the Georgia gubernatorial race, which ended in a
major upset that defied all polls and put a Republican in the governor's
seat for the first time in more than 130 years.
Republican candidate Sonny Perdue managed to unseat Democratic
incumbent Roy Barnes with only 51 percent of the vote. It was the first
time an incumbent governor had not won his second term since Georgia
law allowed back-to-back terms in 1978.
Pundits have attributed the upset to dissatisfaction with the incumbent
for altering a Confederate symbol on the state flag and to effective
stumping by President George W. Bush on behalf of Perdue.
Harris acknowledged no proof exists that anyone rigged the election
systems, but she said, "We'll never know exactly what happened in
Georgia because there's no paper trail to verify the votes."
Harris and other voting activists around the country are calling for
states and certifying authorities to open the election process and
electronic voting systems to public scrutiny to ensure public confidence
in elections.
Officials in Georgia's secretary of state's office did not respond to
repeated calls for comment.
Behler was hired by Automated Business Systems and Services, a large
contracting agency, to work in Diebold's Georgia warehouse from midJune to mid-July 2002, five months before the gubernatorial election.
He was in charge of assembling about 20,000 machines for the election,
testing them and shipping them to 159 counties. But, he said, the work
was complicated by misbehaving machines that presented few clues to
their problems.
"It's hard to track down a problem when you go out to your car and the
first time it starts, the next time the headlights don't work, the next time
you start it the brakes are out, and the next time you start it the door
falls off," Behler said. "That's really the way they were."
Behler said Diebold programmers posted patches to a file-transferprotocol site for him and his colleagues to apply to the machines.
Diebold did not respond to repeated calls for comment, but in an
interview with Salon in February, company spokesman Joseph
Richardson denied the company applied any patches to the Georgia
machines.
"We have analyzed that situation and have no indication of that
happening at all," he said.
Rebecca Mercuri, a computer science professor and research fellow at
Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government who is an expert
on voting machines, says an unregulated change to voting software
would raise big concerns for her.
"Having any change to the operating system allows someone to slip in
anything to the code. If (a patch) was not run through the inspection
process, then there could be a violation of the Georgia state law," she
said.
Indeed, Georgia law requires that companies that make changes to fix
defective systems after they are certified must let state officials know
about the changes and provide test documentation showing that
changes do not do anything to the system other than fix the defect.
Before machines are used in an election, state election boards
conduct logic and accuracy tests (PDF) on them with a mock election to
make sure the machines perform properly. Academics at Kennesaw
State University, led by professor emeritus Brit Williams, have a
contract with the state to perform this testing.
But Behler said Diebold instructed him and his colleagues to fix
problems with the machines before Kennesaw State would see them.
"If they started erring in mass quantities, Kennesaw State's going to
raise a red flag, the secretary of state's going to raise a red flag and
Diebold wouldn't get paid," Behler said.
He said the machines were patched not only in the Diebold warehouse,
but also in county warehouses after they were shipped from Diebold.
At one point, Behler said he went to a warehouse in DeKalb County with
"a high-level Diebold executive" to examine systems that were freezing
up. Behler patched 1,387 machines but said, "We were still running
upwards of 20 to 25 percent errors."
Diebold programmers contacted him and his colleagues and told them
the patch was incorrect and they'd have to load a new one.
"JS equipment is what we were calling it at the time," said Behler. "Junk
shit. Everyone in the warehouse was familiar with the term, to say the
least."
Behler said the patches he applied were never certified. No third party,
other than the Diebold engineers who created the patches, knew what
was in the patches. And once machines were patched, they did not
undergo re-certification.
When he told Kennesaw professor Williams in July that the machines
were being patched, Behler said Williams told him: "Do whatever you
need to do now, but you won't be touching the machines once we start
our systems-testing on them."
Diebold officials, including company president Bob Urosevich, were
angered that he had talked to Williams, according to Behler.
"I literally got called on the carpet and ... told that I was not to speak a
word to any of the Kennesaw State people," Behler said.
Behler said as far as he knows, election officials in the Georgia secretary
of state's office were never told about the patches.
"That's the last thing Diebold wanted," said Behler. "They made that
very clear.... I sat around tables where (Diebold people) discussed
whether they were going to tell them the truth, the half-truth or a
complete lie.
"I understand if a company has information that they need to keep
under tight lip. But when you sit around discussing lying to a client in
order to make sure you're getting paid ... it's an ethics issue."
Williams of Kennesaw State University denies Behler ever mentioned
patches to him and said, to his knowledge, no uncertified patches were
applied to the machines. He said he would be very concerned if this
happened.
"If they were changing the configuration of the machine, that would
certainly be a concern because that would violate the certification," he
said.
Williams does acknowledge, however, that a month and a half before
the November election, he worked with Diebold to apply a patch to the
Windows CE operating system. The voting machines run on version 3.0
of Windows CE, he said, and they patched it to correct problems they
were having with the system.
But he said this patch was passed by Wyle Laboratories, the
independent testing authority that originally certified the machines.
"We asked (Wyle) to take a quick look at it, but we didn't have time to
do a full qualification on it. This was a month and a half before the
election. To go through the full ITA qualification and state certification
takes about six months. We asked them to look at it from the point of
view of whether or not it would have any impact at all on the main line
of the voting software."
As for other patches, Williams said, "We have no idea what Diebold or
anybody else does when they go in their warehouse and shut that door."
Williams said they compare the system when it comes out of the
Diebold warehouse to make sure it's the same software version that was
certified by the ITAs. But he acknowledges that this does not include
reading the source code.
He added, however, "We have absolutely no reason to believe that
Diebold did anything in that warehouse that we're unaware of."
As for Behler, Williams said he's a disgruntled employee who was fired
from the project by Diebold and Automated Business Systems and
Services. ABSS, however, said this isn't true.
Initially, Terrence Thomas, ABSS vice president for the southwest
region, told Wired News that Behler was dismissed for "lack of
performance." But when pressed to elaborate, Thomas consulted
Behler's employee file, which he said he had previously not read, and
admitted there was no indication that Behler was fired or that anyone at
Diebold or ABSS had been disappointed with his performance.
"He was released because his part of the project was completed,"
Thomas said. He repeated that it wasn't a performance issue. "Officially
in my files, there's nothing to indicate that," he said.
James Rellinger, another contractor who worked in the Diebold
warehouse until November, confirms that both Diebold and ABSS
seemed happy with Behler's work.
Rellinger said workers were surprised when they learned Behler had
been replaced and hinted that internal politics were likely the cause.
Behler was replaced by a friend of an ABSS project manager, who was
later hired as a full-time employee of Diebold.
Behler denies he's a disgruntled employee, saying he is going out on a
limb by revealing information that could cost him future work.
"I have seven children to support," he said. "This is not the kind of thing
I would say if it wasn't the truth."
To read Wired News' complete coverage of e-voting, visit the Machine
Politics section.
http://archive.wired.com/politics/law/news/2003/10/60563?currentPage=all
My Response To Being Attacked
By Josh Holland In Raw Story
Concerning #ExitPollGate
I want to take a moment to respond to a recent hit piece against me by Joshua Holland in Raw Story.
It involves a meme I created that the actor Tim Robbins then retweeted. The meme shows the
difference between the exit polls in several states and the results given by the voting machines. I and
many others believe the massive difference in the numbers is due to election fraud, but we’ll get to
that in a moment.
Let’s start with the end of the article where Josh Holland tries to further indict me by closing with “I
asked Lee Camp if he was ‘interested in the fact that this is factually inaccurate and really
misleading? I mean, can a meme be retracted? Is that something that would interest you?’ He didn’t
respond.”
Josh Holland believes he “asked” me this because he sent an email to an account I don’t check often.
As Holland certainly knows, I get hundreds of emails a day. I’m sure he does too. Many of those
emails are from very strange people who send meaningless crap. The name “Josh Holland” did not
stand out to me. Then when I did read the email, he didn’t introduce himself as anyone of note or a
reporter for that matter. Going back through my emails I can see he had a signature at the bottom
that says he’s a writer, but how often do people scan through signatures when they receive weird
sarcastic angry emails? So this is a guy who couldn’t pass the most basic hurdle of journalistic
integrity – Let the person you’re “interviewing” know that you’re interviewing them for an article. And
then he implies that because I didn’t respond, I can’t defend the meme I created.
I can, however, and I will. Not just because I want to correct Josh Holland’s journalism fail but
because I want people to hear the facts behind the corporate mouthpieces who uphold this fraud for
the powers that be.
Josh Holland wants to lead you to believe that exit polls (in my meme and gathered together by
Richard Charnin) are just wildly inaccurate and basically don’t mean anything. But it’s quite easy to
find screen shots or video that verify the exit poll numbers I used. CNN did indeed report Bernie
Sanders was losing by 4% according to exit polls (Watch it here). So if these numbers are incorrect,
that begs the question why CNN or other news outlets would report them at all. I mean, shouldn’t Mr.
Holland spend most of his time writing headlines like, “CNN Reports Wildly Incorrect Exit Poll
Numbers”? That sounds like quite the scandal. Rather than go after CNN or NBC for reporting these
numbers (that he believes are false), Holland attacks me.
Holland goes on to quote Joe Lenski (which he spells “Lensky”) who he says is with Edison
Research. However, it’s tough to know whether Lenski knew he was being interviewed since Holland
prefers to avoid revealing he’s interviewing people for articles. For all we know Lenski was just
making stuff up in an online chat with someone he thought was a sexy co-ed.
Lenski apparently told Holland that American exit polls are “just not designed for that type of
precision. They’re surveys, and like any other survey, they have a margin of error.” What Holland is
very careful to avoid revealing to readers is that there is an exact margin of error. It’s +/-4% according
to Edison Research’s website. However, the NY exit polls were off by TWELVE PERCENT. And
many states were equally wildly off. Holland does a fine job of avoiding such inconvenient facts.
Furthermore, this entire line of thought is a contradiction for Mr. Holland. At one point he wants you to
believe the exit polls Charnin used for his analysis are INCORRECT (different from what was
reported) and then a few paragraphs later he wants you to believe they are CORRECT but NOT
PRECISE (the same as what was reported but it doesn’t matter). Which is it, Mr. Holland? Are they
the correct exit poll numbers but the polls aren’t very good? Or are they incorrect exit poll numbers
altogether? You can’t have it both ways. That’s like saying, “I did NOT sleep with that woman. AND I
didn’t enjoy it.”
Even IF we go with Mr. Holland’s thesis that exit polls in America are all but meaningless but that
they’re REALLY GOOD in other countries, you would think Holland would want to use his masterful
reporting skills to find out why the most powerful “democracy” in the world doesn’t want verifiable
proof that their voting system is working properly. Mr. Holland would surely then start researching the
voting machine audits in places like Chicago where widespread fraud WAS INDEED discovered. Mr.
Holland might also want to let his readers know about Diebold – the company that used to run our
voting machines until they were indicted by federal prosecutors for “worldwide criminal conduct.” Or
he might want to mention how certain voting machines are ripe for hackingaccording to cyber security
experts. But no, facts like that are not good for Mr. Holland’s argument that these elections are
pristine.
Finally Holland seems to confuse two kinds of “adjusted” poll numbers. He thinks that “adjusting” for
non-response rates is the same as “adjusting” for what the voting machines tell us. When people (like
me) say they’re looking at “unadjusted” poll numbers, they mean they’re looking at poll numbers
before they were FORCED to fit with the machine tallies. As election fraud expert and NY Times
bestselling author Greg Palast told me, “After Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004, when exit polls showed
Gore and Kerry as winners, US TV networks asked exit polling contractors to ‘conform’ the results to
the official results. So, of course, all evidence of hanky-panky disappears.” Holland seems to entirely
misunderstand what “adjusted” means. There’s no mention of Lensky carefully explaining this to
Holland, but who knows what happened in that conversation that wasn’t reported.
Or perhaps Holland would like to let his readers know that the 2004 election wasINDEED stolen for
the Republicans as proven by Greg Palast, and that the exit polls showed as much.
But Josh Holland is in a tough spot. He’s trying to defend a system that was recently rated by a
Harvard study as the worst in the Western world for fair elections. That’s not an easy job. It’s like
being the current publicist for Bill Cosby. Holland has to rely on smoke and mirrors because this
system is so clearly corrupt. Over 50% of America already believes the presidential nominating
system is rigged.
So I sent an email to Mr. Holland saying, “Are you interested in the fact that your reporting is factually
inaccurate and really misleading? I mean, can a column be retracted? Is that something that would
interest you?” …I sent it to an email address he doesn’t often check and didn’t identify myself. …I
haven’t heard back.
UPDATE: Richard Charnin and Bob Fitrakis (the author of six books on election integrity) have ALSO
responded to Josh Holland’s sad attempt at reporting. They tear his argument limb from limb with
simple facts. Read their responses HERE.
UPDATE #2: Here is another well-researched article demonstrating election fraud by looking at the
exit polls. It brings up an interesting point that I did not know before. If Holland’s assertion that the exit
polls are all just WILDLY OFF all the time is true, then they would be WAY off for the GOP primary as
well. They AREN’T. According to the article, the GOP primary exit polls have been almost dead on.
This further negates Holland’s evidence-free argument.
Comments ( 27 )
1.
May 10, 2016K
House
Keeping it real Lee :D
2.
May 8, 2016Zedster
Well that sounds easier than picking you up on my shoulders and more fun than washing your car.
And I was very serious, so yes I can help out. Very much on the verge of starting my own page so
this would help me with research too. This will mean I would have to re-activate my FB account and
deal with the insanity/apathy shit but it's for a good cause. So I hope you do a lot more proprostitution stuff then. They would be a fun group to get to know.
3.
May 8, 2016leecamp
Hey, thanks for response. You asked what you could do to help grow the show. And if you're
seriously asking, then here's something. Basically we need people to every week take segment clips which are posted to YouTube.com/RedactedTonight and distribute them to websites/ Facebook
groups/ and Twitter accounts that care about that topic. So pick the one each week that you like best
(for example: a clip about Monsanto), and then spend some time looking for "Stop Monsanto"
websites, Facebook pages, and Twitter accounts. This may take some creativity - For example if it's a
Monsanto clip, then look up natural food sites. Then once you find them, email those sites and ask
them to consider posting the video. Or post the clip on their Facebook group. Or tweet at them and
say "Please check out this clip and retweet it." That honestly is the big help we need. If you're not
able to do it, no worries. And if you find a website or FB group that is AWESOME, feel free to send it
our way. THANKS for all your help! ~Lee
4.
May 8, 2016Zedster
Very well said Claudia! I too have dealt with a good long bout of depression and this election does not
help. I am an ex-pat that has lived in Denmark (no they are not the happiest people in the world, I
hope) for over 20 years. I am actually an army vet from the 80s getting out right at the end of the
Kuwait war. I will make the long story short. I recently woke up to how things really are working and
although I still love my country deeply, I am ashamed of what it really is. So anyways, I too recently
found your show Mr. Camp and love what you are doing. Waiting a week between shows sucks but
hey. I am at a place right now where I want to do anything to help wake people the f%ck up (hate
censoring myself)! So Lee if there is anything I can ever do. Put you on my shoulders so you can be
heard, wash your car whatever sir, just say the word! Really, keep up the good work. I wish I could be
half as articulate as you are. It is a great gift. On a final note about election fraud. I have posted this
everywhere on youtube but I will throw a pitch for it here to. Check out blockchain voting machines. I
have to assume you know what Bitcoin is. It is based on the same type of open source technology.
Yes it is still a machine but it would be very very hard (some say impossible) to corrupt this type of
system without detection.
5.
May 8, 2016C
My vote in Illinois was on a Diebold machine, so they are still being used.
6.
May 6, 2016leecamp
Thank you, Claudia. Incredibly kind of you!
7.
May 6, 2016notcalvin
please keep up the coverage of election fraud till November (at least). you have to repeat it as long as
possible until it gets heated. they get to repeat their BS too. keep fighting ;) greetings from Germany.
8.
May 5, 2016Patricia
My name is Claudia Reyes, I've had suffered from depression for years feeling desperate at not being
able to do anything to end political corruption and violence abroad. In February of this year I started to
actively volunteer for Bernie Sander's campaign and my inner life changed significantly. Finally I
received a response to my prayers from the universe. For a long time I wished with all my heart to
have a person with integrity, morals and principles in the political world. With horror, pain, anger and
sorrow I had been posting in my Facebook everything I know about the crimes that the Clintons have
and continue to commit in Latin America, middle east, India... .... until one woman posted on my wall
a video of RedactedTonight basically suggesting me to laugh a little, I needed to laugh. And it
worked. My gut relaxed for the first time in many years. I used to do stand up comedy but never on
serious issues and I've done journalism on serious topics but never combined both cause I didn't feel
like laughing at cruelty or injustice. Now I watched RedactedTonight because I not only laugh at
serious matter, but also learn; I see Lee as a serious journalist who does his job with integrity and
responsibility. His show reflects the truths and facts that the main stream media hides. His program
has become a main source for me to consult whenever I need to know of something. I am having fun
again and feel inspired by his call to continue fighting at the end of each episode. I am no longer
repressed. Thank you universe for giving us Lee Camp and RedactedTonight and thank you Lee for
working for justice, true love and intelligence, just like Bernie Sanders does. You are not alone and
we, your audience will stand up for you whenever they absurdly attack you.
9.
May 4, 2016jlalbrecht
I found Richard Charnin a couple months ago. Fascinating work. Excellent analysis. I'm subscribed
on YouTube, but I just found this web-site through a tweet today. If the trees all bend one way, you
know which way the wind blows. Keep fighting the good fight! Maybe this election cycle this subject
will get some traction.
10.
May 1, 2016J
The sunny version of history that this kind of journalism tries to back up teaches us that the whole
point of America was voting and democracy and happy sunshine. But when we want to make sure
our votes *are* getting counted, we're told to go sit by the lizard people enthusiasts. Say we're all
completely wrong: we're not asking for anything unreasonable by saying "hmmm, this seems off and
this seems off- hey, maybe we should look into this further." Or so I would've thought.
11.
May 1, 2016Kim
Kaufman
Hi Lee - Your piece got linked today over at Naked Capitalism:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/05/links-5116.html
12.
May 1, 2016Frank
Shannon
Thank you!
13.
May 1, 2016JoAnn
I AM
Thank you for this article Mr Camp and for articulating this gross injustice to the citizens of our
country. Our elections are rigged and everyone in my world has been saying that for years. I never
really believed it, because I didn't bother to investigate. I have been very apathetic to politics in my
adult life and I thank Bernie Sanders for waking me and millions of others from this darkness. We will
not be going back to sleep! I have spoken a lot to my older family and friends about the fraud
occurring in the latest rounds of primary voting and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM say the same
thing....."that's just the way it is." and then they are willing to just fall back into line. I guess that was
me too, except I really didn't think the elections were rigged, since Barack Obama was elected twice
and I voted for him twice. =) I have HOPE for the younger generations now, THEY ARE WOKE! I
have no doubt in my GEN-X mind that the next few years are going to be bumpy ride, but I AM in it for
the long haul and I AM so glad that we are on the same team. BE WELL. ♥
14.
April 30, 2016Lady
Reverb
Raw Story is a joke, and so is Josh Holland. The word is out that they've been busily purging their
regular readership if they support Bernie, and refuse to vote for Hillary.
15.
April 30, 2016leecamp
Thank you! Really appreciate the support!
16.
April 30, 2016Kim
Kaufman
Thank you for this, Lee Camp. Election fraud is the dirty little secret of our elections, from both
parties, and it needs more sunlight. I am honored to say that Joshua Holland "unfriended" me on
Facebook because I kept pointing out his transparent hypocrisies by constantly posting pro-Hillary
and anti-Bernie posts and now he's saying he's supporting Bernie. He's soiled himself thoroughly
getting into this area and exposing his shoddy and biased writing (I will not dignify it by calling it
reporting). Keep it up, Lee Camp - we need more like you!
17.
April 30, 2016leecamp
Ha! Thank you! Welcome to my world. I've been screaming about things that should be national
stories for years. They never are though... But don't give up.
18.
April 30, 2016Shadrack
I am a seventy year old white guy that watches Redacted Tonight religiously. The exit poll scandal
was so maddening that I found Lee Camp's website to see what was here. Seven fucking
comments?!?! That's it? On what should have been a nationwide felony case and the biggest scandal
of the year, and seven fucking comments?! When some over paid professional narcissist under
inflates a freakin football, it's covered coast to coast on every major network for months. Jesus Christ!
I can't believe how apathetic Americans have become over the political situation in this country. Keep
up the good work Lee. Even some of us dinosaurs appreciate what you do.
19.
April 30, 2016Stephen
Thank you for being a voice of reason and clarity in a murky world of waste, fraud and abuse of our
precious democracy!
20.
April 30, 2016Renee
the saying "tall trees catch a lot of wind" apply to you, Lee. Many on our side of the field (e.g. Young
Turks, except maybe for Jimmy Dore) are succumbing already. So you are the last man standing
there in the center of the public eye. I applaud you for being a leader in this entire madness. Good
analysis of the absurdity of holland. Then again: are the people that dumb or numb that they don't see
trough it and need the explanation? Guess not, as you put it so eloquently and funny in one of your
MOC. Keep up your light!
21.
April 30, 2016leecamp
His only response to me on Twitter was "You don't know what you're talking about."
22.
April 30, 2016leecamp
Thank you! And I've joined the groups.
23.
April 30, 2016Victoria
( I realize you have a limited time and to continue to cover this as the headliner may be sticky, but it is
the media collusion that is the biggest hack of our democracy, and the truth is, given your platform,
the BEST THING that could have happened is that WaPo piece by Bump. So I implore you to do
whatever you can to keep up the coverage, for you are the only one out there that is doing it - The
Young Fucking Turks seem to be too afraid to, or idk what is up with them. Please keep it up. Join our
FB group pages Occupy Rigged Elections and Documenting Democratic Primary Election Fraud:
2016, if you haven't already. A writer from Counter Punch finally declared himself there, after lurking
and concluding he had to cover it. This IS 'the political revolution' about which cynics are certain will
fade in the hard glare of Winter, 2017. You have a delicious role to play in it, friend, so whatever you
can do to maintain coverage, I implore you to do it. )
24.
April 30, 2016Mr
Derp
Fuck Josh Holland!
25.
April 30, 2016Padraig
Nice one Lee, hope your tongue gets better soon after so much biting.
26.
April 30, 2016Momo
BOOM!
April 29, 2016Victoria
27.
You saw Richard's response also, I assume. Robert F Kennedy Jr. outlined the play by plays in the
2004 presidential election theft and they exactly match what's going on here, down to the
condescending dismissal by the Washington Post and NYT. Of real interest, and have tried to get
someone with this information, if it has been collated (Election Justice USA ppl may have an idea but
they are so swamped) - the numbers of suspiciously or illegally purged Democratic voters who were
Sanders supporters vs Clinton supporters. For this is essential to follow up on the data breach
theory... Bless you for your role in getting this out there, and - Holland seems to be much more of a
dick than Philip Bump (perhaps growing up Bump instills a certain humility) who wrote a piece for the
Washington Post brushing off the conspiracy theorist wack-o defense, as he tried to explain the
Screen-Shot Heard 'Round The World that caught the WaPo's website totally screwing the numbers.
He ended his condescending lesson about the vulnerability of weak minds with the salient argument
that WaPo gets it's data from AP, and AP explained the situation as a simple case of 'vote entry
error.' But as in the brief exchange I had with him I came to suspect he was a closet sympathizer, as
anyone who covers elections and DC for any length of time would have to be, if they're not an idiot.
He wrote, "I never said I couldn't embrace your conspiracy theory..." and then posted Debbie
Lusinngan's video response to his twitter page, with the comment, "Someone posted this to my
Facebook wall; it's pretty amazing. User name is The Sane Progressive." So he intentionally put her
work out to the world, and without a pejorative disclaimer.. KEEP IT UP - This is THE story, and you
are doing a fantastic job.
http://leecamp.net/my-response-to-being-attacked-by-josh-holland-in-raw-story-concerning-exitpollgate/
ARI BERMAN

@AriBerman


Ari Berman is a senior contributing writer for The
Nation magazine and a Fellow at The Nation Institute. His
new book, Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America, was published
in August 2015 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux. He has written extensively about American politics, civil rights,
and the intersection of money and politics. His stories have also appeared in The New York Times, Rolling
Stone, and The Guardian, and he is a frequent guest and commentator on MSNBC and NPR. His first
book, Herding Donkeys: The Fight to Rebuild the Democratic Party and Reshape American
Politics, was published in 2010 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux. (Photo by Ports Bishop)

ELECTIONS JULY 29, 2016
The Country’s Worst Anti-Voting Law Was Just Struck Down in
North Carolina
The Fourth Circuit appeals court finds that Republicans “targeted African Americans with almost surgical
precision.”
ARI BERMAN

ELECTION 2016 JULY 29, 2016
Americans Who’d Never Heard of Reverend William Barber II
Won’t Be Able to Forget Him After Last Night
His remarkable speech at the DNC put racial, social, and economic justice at the center of the 2016
campaign.
ARI BERMAN

ELECTION 2016 JULY 28, 2016
The Civil-Rights Movement Made Hillary Clinton’s Historic
Nomination Possible
Whatever you think of her, Clinton’s candidacy is an important victory in the long fight for voting rights.
ARI BERMAN

CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS JULY 25, 2016
Tim Kaine Was Fighting for Civil Rights While Donald Trump Was
Discriminating Against African Americans
Kaine won landmark housing discrimination cases while Trump refused to rent to black tenants.
ARI BERMAN

CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS JULY 20, 2016
The Country’s Worst Voter-ID Law Was Just Struck Down
A huge victory for voting rights in Texas.
ARI BERMAN

GET THE NATION IN YOUR INBOX EVERY MORNING
SIGN UP

CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS JULY 19, 2016
9 Percent of the Wisconsin Electorate Just Got Their Right to Vote
Back
A federal court ruled that those without voter ID can vote by signing an affidavit.
ARI BERMAN

CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS JULY 18, 2016
As the GOP Convention Begins, Ohio Is Purging Tens of Thousands
of Democratic Voters
Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to be purged from the voter rolls in the state’s largest
counties.
ARI BERMAN

CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS JULY 15, 2016
Democrats Have a Plan to Register 50 Million New Voters
If more people vote, Trump-Pence loses.
ARI BERMAN

DEMOCRATS JULY 11, 2016
Democrats Unite on Voting Rights
The 2016 Democratic platform has the strongest language on voting rights in the party’s history.
ARI BERMAN

ELECTIONS JUNE 30, 2016
An Iowa Court Blocks 20,000 Ex-Offenders From Voting
Nearly 6 million Americans can’t vote because of discriminatory felon-disenfranchisement laws.
ARI BERMAN
https://www.thenation.com/authors/ari-berman/




CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS
VOTING RIGHTS ACT
FEATURE
AUGUST 16, 2004 ISSUE
How They Could Steal the
Election This Time
Electronic counts, unaudited touch-screen ballots,
enhance opportunities for fraud.
By Ronnie Dugger
JULY 29, 2004

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Print



On November 2 millions of Americans will cast their votes for President in computerized
voting systems that can be rigged by corporate or local-election insiders. Some 98 million
citizens, five out of every six of the roughly 115 million who will go to the polls, will
consign their votes into computers that unidentified computer programmers, working in
the main for four private corporations and the officials of 10,500 election jurisdictions,
could program to invisibly falsify the outcomes.
Click here to help prevent disenfranchisment in this year's election.
Ronnie Dugger wrote the definitive warning essay about the dangers of computerized vote-counting in The New
Yorker of November 7, 1988. Research support was provided by The Nation Institute. Dugger wishes to
acknowledge the special assistance of Frances Mendenhall, Pokey Anderson, Peter Neumann, Rebecca
Mercuri, Roxanne Jekot and David Jefferson, and his debt to hundreds of other reporters whose work cannot be
properly credited here.
The result could be the failure of an American presidential election and its collapse into
suspicions, accusations and a civic fury that will make Florida 2000 seem like a family
spat in the kitchen. Robert Reich, Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary, has written,
“Automated voting machines will be easily rigged, with no paper trails to document
abuses.” Senator John Kerry told Florida Democrats last March, “I don’t think we ought
to have any vote cast in America that cannot be traced and properly recounted.” Pointing
out in a recent speech at the NAACP convention that “a million African-Americans were
disenfranchised in the last election,” Kerry says his campaign is readying 2,000 lawyers
to “challenge any place in America where you cannot trace the vote and count the votes”
[see Greg Palast, “Vanishing Votes,” May 17].
ADVERTISING
The potential for fraud and error is daunting. About 61 million of the votes in November,
more than half the total, will be counted in the computers of one company, the privately
held Election Systems and Software (ES&S) of Omaha, Nebraska. Altogether, nearly 100
million votes will be counted in computers provided and programmed by ES&S and three
other private corporations: British-owned Sequoia Voting Systems of Oakland,
California, whose touch-screen voting equipment was rejected as insecure against fraud
by New York City in the 1990s; the Republican-identified company Diebold Election
Systems of McKinney, Texas, whose machines malfunctioned this year in a California
election; and Hart InterCivic of Austin, one of whose principal investors is Tom Hicks,
who helped make George W. Bush a millionaire.
About a third of the votes, 36 million, will be tabulated completely inside the new
paperless, direct-recording-electronic (DRE) voting systems, on which you vote directly
on a touch-screen. Unlike receipted transactions at the neighborhood ATM, however, you
get no paper record of your vote. Since, as a government expert says, “the ballot is
embedded in the voting equipment,” there is no voter-marked paper ballot to be counted
or recounted. Voting on the DRE, you never know, despite what the touch-screen says,
whether the computer is counting your vote as you think you are casting it or, either by
error or fraud, it is giving it to another candidate. No one can tell what a computer does
inside itself by looking at it; an election official “can’t watch the bits inside,” says Dr.
Peter Neumann, the principal scientist at the Computer Science Laboratory of SRI
International and a world authority on computer-based risks.
The four major election corporations count votes with voting-system source codes. These
are kept strictly secret by contract with the local jurisdictions and states using the
machines. That secrecy makes it next to impossible for a candidate to examine the source
code used to tabulate his or her own contest. In computer jargon a “trapdoor” is an
opening in the code through which the program can be corrupted. David Stutsman, an
Indiana lawyer whose suits in the 1980s exposed a trapdoor that was being used by the
nation’s largest election company at that time, puts it well: “The secrecy of the ballot has
been turned into the secrecy of the vote count.”
According to Dr. David Dill, professor of computer science at Stanford, all elections
conducted on DREs “are open to question.” Challenging those who belittle the danger of
fraud, Dill says that with trillions of dollars at stake in the battle for control of Congress
and the presidency, potential attackers who might seek to fix elections include “hackers,
candidates, zealots, foreign governments and criminal organizations,” and “local officials
can’t stop it.”
Last fall during a public talk on “The Voting Machine War” for advanced computerscience students at Stanford, Dill asked, “Why am I always being asked to prove these
systems aren’t secure? The burden of proof ought to be on the vendor. You ask about the
hardware. ‘Secret.’ The software? ‘Secret.’ What’s the cryptography? ‘Can’t tell you
because that’ll compromise the secrecy of the machines.’… Federal testing procedures?
‘Secret’! Results of the tests? ‘Secret’! Basically we are required to have blind faith.”
The integrity of the vote-counting inside DREs depends on audit logs and reports they
print out, but as Neumann says, these are “not real audit trails” because they are
themselves riggable. The DREs randomly store three to seven complete sets of alleged
duplicates of each voter’s ballot, and sets of these images can be printed out after the
election and manually counted. The companies claim that satisfies the requirement in the
2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) that “a manual audit capacity” must be available.
But as informed computer scientists unanimously agree, if the first set of ballot images is
corrupted, they all are. I asked Robert Boram, the chief engineer who invented a DRE
sold by the RF Shoup voting-systems company, if he could rig his DRE’s three sets of
ballot images. “Give me a month,” he replied.
The United States therefore faces the likelihood that about three out of ten of the votes in
the national election this November will be unverifiable, unauditable and unrecountable.
The private election companies and local and state election officials, when required to
carry out recounts of elections conducted inside the DREs, will order the computers to
spit out second printouts of the vote totals and the computers’ wholly electronic, fakable
“audit trail.” The companies and most of the election officials will then tell the voters that
the second printouts are “recounts” that prove the vote-counting was “100 percent
accurate,” even though a second printout is not a recount.
HAVA was supposed to solve election problems revealed in 2000; instead, it has made
the situation worse. Under the act the Election Assistance Commission (EAC), appointed
by President Bush, is supposed to set standards for the vote-counting process, but four
months before the election the new agency had only seven full-time staff members. On
June 17 the EAC sent $861 million to twenty-five states, mainly to buy computerized
machines for which no new technical standards have been set. Its just-appointed fifteenmember technical standards committee does not include more than one leading critic of
computerized vote-counting.
Rather than completely testing the vote-counting codes, there is some secretive testing of
systems by three private companies that are chosen by the pro-voting-business National
Association of State Election Directors. The companies consult obsolete pro-company
and completely voluntary standards promulgated by the Federal Election Commission
and get paid by the very companies whose equipment is being tested. The three private
companies, speciously called Independent Testing Authorities, together constitute a
Potemkin village to falsely assure the states and the voters of the security of the systems.
Often their work is misrepresented as “federal testing.” The states then test and “certify”
the systems, and the local jurisdictions put on dog-and-pony-show “logic and accuracy
tests,” which are not capable of discovering hidden codes that would change vote totals.
“The system is much more out of control than anyone here may be willing to admit,” Dr.
Michael Shamos, a computer scientist at Carnegie-Mellon University and for many years
an examiner of voting machines for Texas and Pennsylvania, told a House panel on June
24. “There’s virtually no control over how software enters a voting machine.” Shamos
told another House panel on July 20, “There are no adequate standards for voting
machines, nor any effective testing protocols.”
Hackable computer codes control vote-counting in all three kinds of computerized
systems that will be used again in the 2004 elections: the ballotless DREs, on which some
36 million will vote; optical-scan systems that electronically tally paper ballots marked
by the voters, on which 40 million people will vote; and punch-card ballots, also
tabulated by computerized card-readers, which gained notoriety in 2000 and are still used
by 22 million voters. (Another 16 million still vote on the old lever machines, about a
million on hand-counted paper ballots.)
Florida 2000 was universally misunderstood and mischaracterized in the press as a crisis
of hanging chads on the punch-card ballots. The serious issue, then as now, was
embodied in the explicit though all but unreported position that James Baker, George W.
Bush’s field commander in Florida, staked out to stop the recounting of votes. The
computerized vote-counting systems, Baker declared, are “precision machinery” that both
count and recount votes more accurately than people do. Now, with Senator Kerry
demanding recountability, an ominously intensifying partisan split has developed in
Washington over whether to have a voter-verified paper trail and, when necessary, to
conduct recounts with it.
Torment in Washington
Though no broad citizens’ movement has formed against computerized vote-counting, a
nationwide backlash against unverifiable paperless voting has. The paper ballots used in
the op-scan and punch-card systems already provide a voter-verified paper audit trail
(VVPAT). The principal proposed security safeguard for the DRE system was invented,
but not patented, ten years ago by computer scientist Rebecca Mercuri, now a research
fellow at Harvard. In her solution, after voters record their choices on the touch-screen,
they confirm them on a paper ballot that appears under glass and then push a button to
cast the vote, causing the machine to deposit the paper ballot in a box that will hold it for
recounting if that is ordered. The printer for the paper ballots for each voting machine
should cost about $50; the total add-on could be $300-$600. Many jurisdictions also have
the alternative of expanding or acquiring the relatively inexpensive optical-scan systems
or other systems already in place that create paper trails.
In the US Senate seven Democrats and the one Independent are co-sponsoring a bill by
Senators Bob Graham and Hillary Clinton to require paper trails on DREs by November,
with a loophole for jurisdictions whose officials deem it to be technologically impossible.
Clinton told the press that without a voter-verified paper trail GOP-leaning corporations
might program voting machines to help Republicans steal elections [see sidebar, page
16]. In an interview in his hideaway office in the Capitol, Graham told me that he regards
his and Clinton’s bill as so obviously needed that it’s “a no-brainer.” The absence of a
paper trail on the DREs could endanger “the legitimacy” of November’s election,
Graham said.
New Jersey Democrat Rush Holt introduced a House bill more than a year ago requiring
a paper trail on DREs. It has 149 co-sponsors, including a few prominent Republicans.
Holt says, “The verification has to be something that the voter herself or himself has to
do”; without that, “we will never have a truly secure election.” Holt’s bill has opened up
a partisan divide in the House. The chairman of the committee to which his bill is
assigned, Ohio Republican Bob Ney, informed Holt that he is against the bill and would
not allow a hearing on it. A few days later Graham and Holt wrote their fellow members
of Congress that “without an independent, voter-verified paper trail, we will be able only
to guess whether votes are accurately counted.” Last month Ney relented and scheduled
two hearings. Holt plans to offer his bill as an amendment to the Treasury appropriation
after Congress returns from its August recess. Graham is still mulling his strategy.
The principal stated objection to a DRE paper trail comes from some spokespersons for
the disabled, who characterize it as a step back from the touch-screen’s improved
accessibility and privacy. Many election officials, whose work paper ballots make both
auditable and much more extensive, object variously that the attachment will add costs,
that the printers might fail and that paper ballots can be stolen or counterfeited and
sometimes produce somewhat different totals.
Leading citizen organizations have been split. Initially the League of Women Voters,
concerned to minimize invalidly cast ballots, opposed the paper trail, but there was a
revolt in the chapters and a petition for the paper trail was signed by 800 members. At the
league’s June convention, after a fight led by Barbara Simons, past president of the
Association of Computer Machinery, the league switched sides, endorsing voting systems
that are “recountable.” Common Cause, placing the highest value on insuring that every
vote is counted and can be recounted if necessary, has been among the leaders of the fight
for the paper trail.
Around the States
Not surprisingly, the starkest resistance to the voter-verified paper trail comes from
Florida, where more than half the citizens will have to vote on touch-screen systems in
November. The President’s brother, Governor Jeb Bush, and Jeb’s Secretary of State,
Glenda Hood, express unqualified confidence in the trustworthiness of the DRE systems
and militantly oppose providing a paper-ballot trail for them. Hood has denied that the
electronic voting machines can be tampered with in the software, saying: “The touchscreen machines are not computers. You’d have to go machine by machine, all over the
state.” A spokeswoman for her says flatly that “a manual recount is unnecessary.”
This past spring a powerful state senator proposed to make it illegal to recount votes in
the DRE systems, but she backed down when called on it by activists. Then Ed Kast,
director of Hood’s division of elections, who has since resigned, sought to achieve the
same purpose by diktat, issuing a formal ruling that, despite the extant state law requiring
recounts under certain circumstances, supervisors of elections do not need to recount
DRE ballots. The ACLU and other groups have sued to invalidate that ruling; a
spokesperson for the state Republican Party excoriates the suit as a left-wingers’ “ploy to
undermine voters’ confidence.”
Representative Robert Wexler, a Democrat from the southern tier of the three big
counties on the Atlantic, which for election scandals is to Florida what Cook County is to
Illinois, sued state and county election officials in state and federal court to require the
VVPAT on DREs. He argues that allowing some voters to have manual recounts but not
others violates the Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore compelling equal treatment of
voters (although the majority specified it was only for that election). To date his suits,
opposed at every step by the Bush Administration in Tallahassee, have gotten nowhere. If
he loses, half the voters in Florida, those voting on DREs, will be denied the manual
recounts that the other half can have.
The Bush forces in Florida geared up for another purge of released felons from the voter
rolls. Ion Sancho, supervisor of elections for Leon County, admits with shame that the
state’s felon purge in 2000 resulted in more than 50,000 legal voters being
disenfranchised. The state elections division identified 47,000 more suspected felons, a
list disproportionately heavy with blacks, and asked that local election supervisors purge
them. The Bush people refused to make the list public, but were ordered to do so by a
judge. Only then was it discovered that the list excluded felons who are Hispanic. In
Florida Hispanics tend to vote Republican. This dandy error was “absolutely
unintentional,” the Bush people said–while abandoning the then indefensible list. Miami
Herald columnist Jim Defede wrote that Hood–an “amazing incompetent or the leader of
a frightening conspiracy”–must resign.
“What are we going to do if there’s a close race?” Wexler asked in theOrlando Sentinel.
“The voting records of these machines will have disappeared in cyberspace.” He told me
angrily: “Apparently their motives are to suppress the vote in Florida in a number of
different ways. They are refusing a paper trail on a computerized voting machine. They
are again preparing on the felons–they’ve got a new and improved process. I don’t trust
’em to do the right thing.” This summer, Representative Alcee Hastings, whose district
includes Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach, exclaimed, “Any way we cut it, these
people are going to try to steal this election.”
The Miami-Dade Reform Coalition asked Jeb Bush to audit the touch-screen machines
this summer. Bush’s spokesperson rebuffed that as “an accusation du jour.” Undeterred,
Democratic US Senator Bill Nelson of Florida demanded, “Why not do an audit when so
much is at stake?… The national election for President could ride on the results coming
out of Florida.” Senator Nelson even sent a letter to Attorney General John Ashcroft
asking that the federal government audit the machines.
This past spring in California, Diebold systems malfunctioned in two counties,
disenfranchising thousands of voters. Secretary of State Kevin Shelley discovered that the
voting systems in seventeen counties in the state had not been certified, as required by
law. After two days of tumultuous hearings in Sacramento, during which high-level
election officials called the company’s behavior “despicable” and accused its officials of
lying, Shelley prohibited the use of Diebold’s systems in four counties, the first time this
has happened in the United States. Shelley, who has said to the Los Angeles Times that he
doesn’t want to be “the Katherine Harris of the West Coast,” also made the certification
of voting systems in ten more counties dependent on their adoption of twenty-three
security improvements that he specified. One of these requires those counties to let
citizens vote on paper if they want to, but Shelley flinched at requiring a DRE paper trail
this year. Four counties and advocates of the disabled sued Shelley to block his actions,
but a federal judge ruled he had the authority and had used it reasonably.
Two secretaries of state, Republicans Dean Heller in Nevada and Matt Blunt in Missouri,
have required that DREs in their states have a voter-verified paper ballot for the
November election. Sequoia is producing the Mercuri VVPAT on demand for Nevada,
and several small election companies, including Avante and AccuPoll, have built Mercuri
attachments, won their certification and are ready to sell them to local jurisdictions now.
Among the thirty-one other states with DRE voting systems in some of their jurisdictions,
as of early summer legislatures in five had rejected requiring the paper trail, another nine
were considering such a requirement and seventeen had no such proposal before them.
In swing-state Ohio, under procedures approved by Republican Secretary of State
Kenneth Blackwell, thirty-one counties decided they would not use paperless DREs in
November, and three said they would. Blackwell then ruled that because of unsolved
security problems, none of them will. In Maryland, which imposed Diebold DREs
statewide in 2002, the Board of Elections ruled that paper ballots cast in the March
primary by citizens who did not want to vote on the DREs would not be counted. That’s
now in the courts. The Campaign for Verifiable Voting presented 13,000 signatures for a
paper trail and called for the resignation of the state elections chief, Linda Lamone, who,
sitting tight, said, “I think everything is going to be just fine.” In Texas, Representative
Ciro Rodriguez, chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, was renominated by 150
votes until 419 “found votes” made challenger Henry Cuellar the winner. Rodriguez is
contesting the outcome, but since the voting in Bexar County (San Antonio) was
conducted on DREs, the votes there can’t be recounted. “There’s no paper trail to verify
what was put in,” Cuellar said.
A paper trail will not assure that elections won’t be stolen in the DREs. “The only thing
the VVPAT will do is give us the ability to prove that it happened,” says Roxanne Jekot
of Cumming, Georgia, a self-taught computer specialist who has become one of the most
effective activists against paperless computerized voting. “There is nothing to deter that
single outsourced information-technology worker [from manipulating the machine].
Nobody can prove that he did it.”
Many states require recounts if an outcome in a computer-counted race is within a margin
of less than 1 percent or a half or quarter percent, but that invites crooked programmers,
if any such be at work, to jimmy their rigged outcomes to fall outside the recounttriggering spreads.
Furthermore, a paper trail isn’t an audit unless the ballots are recounted. Even before the
advent of touch-screen systems, obtaining actual recounts of elections was becoming
more difficult. Election officials, election companies and state laws have often combined
to block recounts or discourage narrowly losing candidates from getting them. Incredibly,
in 2002 the legislature in Nebraska, the home state of Election Systems & Software,
outlawed recounts of the paper ballots in the ES&S optical-scan computerized ballotcounting systems that tally 85 percent or so of the votes in that state. Colorado requires
that for elections conducted on DRE machines, recounts must be conducted on the very
same machines.
In Alabama two years ago, during a controversy over an election for governor conducted
mostly on op-scan machines, Attorney General Bill Pryor, backing up the sheriff in one
questioned county, ruled officially that under state law anyone recounting the ballots
would be subject to arrest. This year President Bush, circumventing Senate hearings,
elevated Pryor to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in a recess appointment.
‘It’s Really a Matter of Trust’
Confident, friendly, but officious, Jesse Durazo, the registrar of voters of Santa Clara
County in the heart of the Silicon Valley, is typical of hundreds of local election officials
who berate “the academics.” This past spring, despite dire warnings from Professors
Neumann of SRI and Dill of Stanford, Durazo led his county into buying 5,500 of the
Sequoia AVC Edge DREs at $3,000 each ($20 million, figuring in everything). The
anteroom of his county election headquarters is festooned with cheery signs such as one
saying Voting Just Got Easier. He is delighted that DREs will facilitate voting by those
who speak a foreign language (including Spanish, Vietnamese and Chinese).
Durazo said that the AVC had first been approved by the federal government (which is
not correct) and then certified by the California secretary of state. He said that providing
a voter-verified ballot would open the way to “unlimited error,” while computer error, in
contrast, can be “quantified.” As for Trojan horses smuggling in corrupt instructions, he
said in a confident tone, “I don’t have those fears.” Stealing votes in the computers is
next to impossible, he insisted, because local ballots are set up at the last minute, there
are a large number of races and ballot initiatives in any one election, and the order of the
candidates’ positions on the ballots is rotated in different precincts.
The three sets of all the votes, kept in the computer, provide the recount, he said. Are
those not just copies of each other, automatically made? Durazo exclaimed in high
dudgeon: “It’s a redundant perfection!… It starts with the premise that the information in
the system is correct.”
Alfred Gonzales, Durazo’s Filipino outreach specialist for voters who speak Tagalog,
demonstrated the AVC, a sign on the top of which said Try It Out Today. No More
Punchcards! I voted on it and asked Gonzales how I knew for sure that my vote would be
counted. “Because it will be registered in the machine, saved in the hard drive, and put on
a cartridge,” he said. “At the end of the day it will be in the printout of the total.” How
did he know the machine would do that? “Because it has been federally certified!” he
said. “There is fool-proof security.” Well, one more thing, I asked. There’s no ballot–
what if you need a recount? “It’s really a matter of trusting the machine,” Gonzales said.
Patting the AVC gently, he intoned with pride, “It’s really a matter of trust.”
“These companies are basically saying ‘trust us,'” Rebecca Mercuri told theNew York
Times. “Why should anybody trust them? That’s not the way democracy is supposed to
work.” Douglas Kellner, a leader on the New York City Board of Elections, exclaimed at
a meeting of computer specialists in Berkeley this past spring, “I think the word ‘trust’
ought to be banned from election administration!” Dr. Avi Rubin, computer science
professor and technical director of the Information Security Institute at Johns Hopkins
University, recently testified before the federal Election Assistance Commission, “The
vendors, and many election officials, such as those in Maryland and Georgia, continue to
insist that the machines are perfectly secure. I cannot fathom the basis for their claims. I
do not know of a single computer security expert who would testify that these machines
are secure.”
Mercuri wrote in her dissertation on vote-counting in 2001 that “security flaws (such as
Trojan horse attacks)…are possible in all of the computer-based voting systems” and that
providing thorough examinations of source code and other circuits for DREs that vary
from municipality to municipality “is a Herculean task–one that is likely not to be
affordable, even if it were accomplishable.”
Not all the scientists agree. Michael Shamos of Carnegie-Mellon, who once warned that
computerized vote-counting is highly vulnerable to fraud, now takes the position that “the
issue is not whether voting systems are absolutely secure, but whether they present
barriers sufficiently formidable to give us confidence in the integrity of our elections.”
Voting Machines Stolen in Georgia
In 2000 five out of six Georgians cast a paper ballot that could be recounted on ES&S
systems. In January 2001, in a speech to the Democratic-controlled legislature, Georgia
Secretary of State Cathy Cox, a Democrat who is expected to run for governor in 2006,
declared that considering all the recent problems down in Florida, Georgia should adopt
one “uniform electronic voting system by November 2004.” Upon Cox’s fervent
recommendation of the just-born Diebold Election Systems, in May 2002 Georgia agreed
to pay Diebold $54 million for 19,000 DRE voting systems. The counties and cities of
Georgia had chosen their own voting machines for the last time, and, less obviously,
Georgians had lost their ability to recount their votes in contested elections.
At once Diebold set to manufacturing 282 of its AccuVote TS voting systems a day.
Some of the earliest ones arriving in Georgia, sent out for use in the training of election
workers, were left in a hotel conference room overnight, stolen and never recovered. Late
that June the secret vote-counting codes inside nine to fourteen more of the Diebold
machines were stolen. Diebold made an uncounted number of apparently illegal changes
in the election-conducting code between June and November. The memory cards on
which the votes on each of the computers were recorded on election day all over Georgia
had no encryption. According to Rob Behler, who served as Diebold’s production
deployment manager in Georgia during the first half of that summer, those cards could be
used to change the results manually, precinct by precinct.
Incumbent US Senator Max Cleland and incumbent Governor Roy Barnes, both
Democrats, were odds-on favorites to win re-election. A week before the voting
an Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll showed Cleland ahead by five points, 49-44, but on
election day he lost to his Republican opponent, Saxby Chambliss, by seven points, 5346, a twelve-point swing. The loss of Governor Barnes to Sonny Perdue was even more
remarkable: a one-week switch of fourteen percentage points. These were suspicious
anomalies, and subsequently in a Peach State Poll one in eight Georgia voters were “not
very confident” or “not at all confident” that the DREs had produced accurate results;
another 32 percent were only “somewhat confident.”
In his front parlor at home in Georgia, Rob Behler told me that just before or just as he
took over the Atlanta warehouse for Diebold, some of the voting machines had been sent
out to “do demos,” and in one southern county “somebody broke in and stole…[nine or]
fourteen of the machines and, I think, one of the servers.” He says the vote-counting
programs in the stolen computers could have been completely reconstructed by reverse
engineering and employed to jimmy the election.
“Quality-checking” the AccuVote machines as they arrived from Diebold at a warehouse
in Atlanta, Behler and his crew found problems, he says, with “every single one” of them
and about a fifth of them were shoved aside as unusable. When Diebold’s programmers
wanted “patches,” that is, changes, inserted into the voting-system software, Behler says,
they sent them to him via the company’s open, insecure File Transfer Protocol (FTP) site
in cyberspace. On his own unsecured laptop (resting on his desk as he spoke), Behler
made twenty-two or twenty-three of the cards that were used to change the programs in
the machines.
The night of the November 2002 election, sixty-seven of the memory cards used in
Fulton County (Atlanta) disappeared. Running his laptop with a dual battery, Behler says,
in six or seven hours he could have changed the totals on those sixty-seven cards.
“There’s no technical problem. There was absolutely zero protection on the card itself.
You throw the card in, you just drill down into its files.”
Brit Williams, a computer consultant at Kennesaw State University who runs Georgia’s
testing of voting systems, confirmed to me that the memory cards were not encrypted and
all had the same password (1111), but each one, he contended, was “unique to its
machine.” He snapped, “We had 22,000 voting stations. How would you like to be in
charge of 22,000 passwords?” Williams said the sixty-seven missing memory cards in
Atlanta had been left in the machines by forgetful workers and were recovered.
The Georgia election of 2002 illustrates how serious risks of technical malfunctions and
malicious tampering can occur without anyone outside the voting business finding out
about them. No doubt in part because of the hasty start-up, Diebold’s “security,” though
approved by the independent testing authorities and the state, was in fact farcical. Both of
the losing Democrats had backed installation of the DRE systems statewide, so they
could hardly call for recounts that their own state party had made literally impossible.
The Kids Prick Open a Scandal
Some kids who are “really interested in computers” were playing around last year,
spidering through the links on various websites, when they discovered that Diebold had
an unsecured FTP site (the same one Behler had used). One of the boys noted the fact on
his website. Some other material on that site–not the stuff about Diebold–attracted a lot
of hits, and that automatically led Google, the cyberspace search engine, to position it
among the early-listed sites for many searches. One day Bev Harris, a literary publicist in
Washington who was doing research for a book on vote-counting in computers, fed
Google the right search words and the FTP site itself popped up. Knowing little about
computers, she turned to David Allen, who was publishing her book, and he recognized
the openly posted source codes and much other data concerning Diebold voting
machines.
A small group of activists in Georgia worked with Harris. One of them, Roxanne Jekot,
who runs a software consulting firm, analyzed “almost every line” of the Diebold source
code and found many ways to change vote totals there and also in the Microsoft operating
code. “The software is totally junk,” she says. “They sold vaporware.” Determined to get
peer review of what she was finding, Jekot approached David Dill, the Stanford computer
science professor.
“Both Roxanne and Bev were very courageous and determined to lift the veil of secrecy
on the code,” Dill says. “I think most academics would be much more cautious,
especially about publishing the fact that they looked at the code. I certainly was, and I
wasn’t about to get other people in trouble by asking them to help me. A number of us
would be inclined to talk to lawyers before doing anything too bold. So it made a huge
difference that Bev posted the code in New Zealand for everyone to download. That
reduced but didn’t eliminate the legal risks of the Johns Hopkins/Rice University people
looking at the code. If Bev and whoever else was involved in releasing this code had not
been so brave, people [with strong professional reputations] might not have been able to
speak out so freely.”
After some agreements on a division of roles, Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins and three
other scientists produced a devastating twenty-three-page exposure of the Diebold
software. That was followed by two more damaging technical studies in Ohio. Then a
“Red Team” exercise to break the Diebold code was staged at RABA Technologies’
headquarters in Maryland. Four of the eight computer scientists on the team had worked
at the National Security Agency, and the team director had been the senior technical
director for the NSA. The team concluded, “A voter can be deceived into thinking he is
voting for one candidate when, in fact, the software is recording the vote for another
candidate.” A security vulnerability “allows a remote attacker to get complete control of
the machine.” And one can “automatically upload malicious software” that will “modify
or delete elections.” Some kids sniffing around in cyberspace had led, step by step, to the
dawning national realization that computerized vote-counting puts democracy in grave
danger.
What You Can Do
Public interest groups are mobilizing to head off another Florida. Petitions calling for a
paper trail for DREs have attracted something approaching half a million signatures. Lou
Dobbs’s quick poll on CNN on “paper receipts of electronic votes” was running 5,735 to
85 for them on July 20. Greg Palast and Martin Luther King III have more than 80,000
signatures on their petition against paperless touch-screens and the purging of voter rolls.
Global Exchange, the San Francisco-based organization, is inviting twenty-eight
nonpartisan foreign observers to monitor the US election. Eleven members of Congress
asked Kofi Annan to send UN monitors. Cindy Cohn of the Electronic Frontier
Foundation is organizing attorneys for litigation against paperless electronic voting.
In mid-June the California secretary of state approved the nation’s first set of standards
for a verified paper trail for touch-screen machines. A recent “Voting, Vote Capture and
Vote Counting” symposium at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government has produced
an “Annotated Best Practices,” available at www.ljean.com/files/ABPractices.pdf. On
June 29 the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and the Brennan Center for Justice,
with the endorsement of Common Cause, the NAACP, People for the American Way and
most of the leading scientific critics of paperless touch-screen voting, sent the nation’s
local election officials a “call for new security measures for electronic voting machines,”
including local retention of independent security experts; the full report is available
atwww.civilrights.org/issues/voting/lccr_brennan_report.pdf.
Douglas Kellner, the New York City election expert, believes the best practical remedy
for the dangers of computerized vote-counting is voting on optical-scan systems, posting
the election results in the precincts and keeping the ballots with the machines in which
they were counted. In all computerized vote-counting situations the precinct results
should be publicly distributed and posted in the precincts before they are transmitted to
the center for final counting, Kellner says. Once they are sent from the precinct the audit
trail is lost.
Citizens can stay current on election developments via several websites: electionline.org,
a reliable and up-to-date source; VerifiedVoting.org, Dill’s group; notablesoftware.com,
Mercuri’s site; blackboxvoting.org, Bev Harris’s site; countthevote.org, the site of the
Georgia group led by Jekot; and these will key into many others. For a steady flow of
news stories on this subject (and a few others) from around the country, get on the e-mail
list of [email protected]. Official information concerning each state is available online at
each state’s website for its secretary of state.
People should go down to their local election departments and ask their supervisor of
elections how they are going to know that their votes are counted–and refuse to take
“Trust us,” or “Trust the machines,” for an answer. They can be poll watchers. Many
organizations are fostering poll watching, including People for the American Way’s
Election Protection 2004 project. Common Cause “has made election monitoring a major
project,” a spokesperson says. VerifiedVoting.org is concentrating on having people
watch election technology, including pre-election testing as well as the procedures on
election day. Bev Harris is organizing people to do such work (see her website).
Rebecca Mercuri says that if you believe an election has been corrupted through voting
equipment, you should collect affidavits from voters; get the results from every voting
machine for all precincts; get the names and titles of everyone involved; inventory the
equipment, including the software, and try to have it impounded; demand a recount; and
go to the press. Noting that all counties that have rushed to purchase DRE voting systems
also have paper-ballot systems in place to handle absentee voters, motor-voters and
emergency ballots for when the system breaks down, she suggests mothballing the DREs
and using paper ballots. “Counties are saying there’s nothing they can do but use the
DREs in November, and that is simply untrue,” Mercuri declares.
Much of this would be unnecessary if Congress enacted either the Graham-Clinton or the
Holt bill, which would empower voters to verify their own votes and create a paper trail.
The computerized voting companies have precipitated a crisis for the integrity of
democracy. Three months to go.
SIGN UP
RELATED UPDATES: FROM THE NATION AND
DCCC. YOUR EMAIL WILL REMAIN PRIVATE.
MOST POPULAR
1
THE UNITED STATES AND NATO ARE PREPARING FOR A
MAJOR WAR WITH RUSSIA
2
AMERICANS WHO’D NEVER HEARD OF REVEREND WILLIAM
BARBER II WON’T BE ABLE TO FORGET HIM AFTER LAST
NIGHT
3
SHERROD BROWN TEACHES DEMOCRATS HOW TO DEMOLISH
TRUMP’S FALSE-PROPHET POPULISM
4
WHAT THE LEAKED E-MAILS DO AND DON’T TELL US ABOUT
THE DNC AND BERNIE SANDERS
5
WHY HILLARY CLINTON DOESN’T DESERVE THE BLACK VOTE
SIGN UP
RELATED UPDATES: FROM THE NATION AND
DCCC. YOUR EMAIL WILL REMAIN PRIVATE.
GET A DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION FOR JUST $9.50!
SUBSCRIBE
SIGN UP
RELATED UPDATES: FROM THE NATION AND
DCCC. YOUR EMAIL WILL REMAIN PRIVATE.
YOU'RE READING 1 OF 6 FREE
ARTICLES AVAILABLE FOR THE NEXT 30 DAYS
CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION.
Get unlimited access to The Nation for as low as 37 cents a week!
Already a subscriber? Log in here.
SUBSCRIBE

Facebook
 Twitter
 Email
 Print
RONNIE DUGGER Ronnie Dugger is the author of The Politician, a biography of
Lyndon Johnson, and other books and articles, the founding editor of the Texas
Observer, and the recipient of the 2011 George Polk career award in journalism.
To submit a correction for our consideration, click here.
For Reprints and Permissions, click here.
https://www.thenation.com/article/how-they-could-steal-election-time/
How trustworthy are electronic voting
systems in the US?
Written by Beth Clarkson on 05 June 2015. Posted in Politics
When you do your civic duty, and cast your vote for the various candidates and public propositions at an electronic
voting machine, how confident are you that the results will be tabulated honestly?
If you feel less than sanguine about it and do a bit of the research to assuage your doubts, be prepared to feel even
less confident afterwards. After years of casual research, the results I found have led me to file a lawsuit requesting
access to the records needed to perform an audit myself.
My statistical analysis shows patterns indicative of vote manipulation in machines. The manipulation is relatively
small, compared with the inherent variability of election results, but it is consistent. These results form a pattern that
goes across the nation and back a number of election cycles. I’ve downloaded data and verified the results from
several states for myself. Furthermore, the manipulation is not limited to a single powerful operator. My assessment
is that the data reveals multiple (at least two) agents working independently to successfully alter voting results.
What convinced me that vote fraud is possible?
For me, it started with the 2004 Ohio presidential election. In 2005 I obtained and examined that data and it
confirmed what other statisticians had said – that the results were highly suspicious. The official report from the
congressional hearing on that election describes it as 'the abuse and manipulation of electronic voting machines and
the arbitrary and illegal behavior of a number of elected and election officials which effectively disenfranchised tens
of thousands of voters in order to change the outcome of an election.'
For a thorough assessment, I recommend reading 'Post-Election Audits: Restoring Trust in Elections' published by
the Brennan Center for Justice which includes a lengthy appendix of various well documented voting equipment
problems. The audit in my county (Sedgwick, Kansas) that I wish to perform is similar to those recommended in this
report. Currently, my county does not perform any sort of post-election verification of voting machine results, not
even for recounts. I know because I requested such a recount after the November 2014 election. That request was
denied.
The voting machine software used is proprietary and even the election officials are not allowed to inspect it. This is
termed Black Box Voting and combined with Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting, which permits touchscreen
machines and does not require a paper trail allows a situation ripe for exploitation. In addition, as Harper’s
Magazine reported in 2012, the security of these machines is so lax that:
'As recently as September 2011, a team at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory
hacked into one of Diebold’s old Accuvote touchscreen systems. Their report asserted that anyone with $26
in parts and an eighth-grade science education would be able to manipulate the outcome of an
election….Johnston’s group also breached a system made by another industry giant, Sequoia, using the
same “man in the middle” hack - a tiny wireless component that is inserted between the display screen and
the main circuit board - which requires no knowledge of the actual voting software.'
Also, there’s the fact that the polls are red-shifted (where there is systematic biasing toward Republican candidates)
and have been for several election cycles. This is routinely assumed to be due to Republicans being less likely to
answer pollsters, but there is no empirical justification for it. It’s used by polling organizations in their models in order
to more accurately predict official results.
What convinced me to take action was a paper titled ‘Primary Election Results Amazing Statistical Anomalies’ by
Francois Choquette and James Johnson. After analyzing the same elections (which I downloaded myself from
various state government sites) and confirming Choquette and Johnson's results, I had to try and do something
about the problem. The data I’ve analyzed supports their hypothesis that we have a serious pervasive and
systematic problem with electronic voting machines.
The results of my analysis
Here are the results for three different elections, all occurring after the Choquette and Johnson paper was published,
all three conform to their predictions: the 2012 Ohio presidential race, the 2014 Wisconsin gubernatorial race and
the 2014 Kansas Senate elections.
If there is no significant interaction between voting precinct size and %Republican (%R) vote (our null hypothesis),
then we expect no significant slope to the ratio of the cumulative sums of Republican votes to total votes cast for
sufficiently large n. While there will be considerable variation in the initial terms of the summation, as n grows large,
the ratio will converge to the true proportion p, which I express as a percent1.
Put another way, if the variation is randomly distributed across all precinct sizes, then the law of large numbers
ensures that the sample proportion will quickly approach the true proportion. However, if there is a relationship
where the larger precincts have a larger %R votes, this will show up as a positive slope in the cumulative ratios of
the two sums. If the inverse relationship holds, we will see a negative slope in the cumulative ratios.
This formulation could be extended to multiple races. Elections in non-overlapping jurisdictions would be
independent under the null, while multiple races with overlapping jurisdictions would need more careful computation.
In this model, %R will converge quickly to p if the variable on the x-axis is randomly distributed. If it does not
converge for a given sequence (such as precinct size), that indicates that you have located a signal amidst even a
large amount of noise. Graphing the cumulative percentage versus the cumulative votes ordered by precinct size
allows a quick visual inspection to look for a suspicious trend.
The graph below shows the cumulative votes (x-axis) by %R (y-axis) model for three different races in three different
states.
There is an expectation that %R vote will go down with the size of the precincts due to the association of rural
districts with the %R vote. These trends are clear in the data. For the concern regarding voting machine
manipulation, I restricted the visual inspection to the right half of the graph showing the larger precincts associated
with higher density population centers. This truncation of the data eliminates the confounding effect of rural districts
which are expected to have both a higher %R vote and smaller precincts in terms of number of votes cast.
In all three cases, there is an indication of an upward trend as we get to the largest precincts. The downward trend
on the left of zero to approximately 600,000 to 800,000 cumulative votes is expected and appropriate.
The upward trend on the right is the pattern that concerns me. It shouldn’t be there at all. But such a pattern would
be expected under the hypothesis of vote fraud proposed in the Choquette and Johnson paper.
Given that the signal exists, another approach to demonstrating this is by simple linear regression restricted to
precincts with more than 500 votes cast. When separated out by machine type, the evidence for vote fraud by
machine or software sabotage is compelling. My results for the three elections are broken out by machine type for
the top five voting systems.
Wisconsin 2014 gubernatorial race results
Wisconsin has three voting systems which show a statistically significant positive linear relationship between the two
variables.
In this graph, look at the green line. It’s approximately what I expect when there is no effect attributable to the
number of votes cast. The green line is the result of the precincts with ‘none’ listed as their primary voting machine
equipment and either Dominion (Sequoia) or Command Central-Edge for the ADA voting. It does not have a
statistically significant linear relationship between the number of votes cast and %R.
The voting systems represented by the three red lines all show a statistically significant effect for a linear regression
analysis with votes cast being the independent variable and %R the dependent variable. These lines all
demonstrate a clear upward trend on the right.
The purple line doesn’t show a similar trend and doesn’t have a statistically significant effect for a linear regression
analysis.
Ohio 2012 presidential results
Four of the five voting systems shown have statistically significant linear trends. The voting system represented by
the green line in the center is the only system in large scale use that does not confirm such a trend. The voting
systems represented by the two red lines both show statistically significant linear positive linear relationships for %R
with votes cast.
The voting systems represented by the two blue lines both show statistically significant linear negative linear
relationships for %R with votes cast. The different systems show different patterns, which I interpret as representing
different scales or types of manipulation.
In short, the evidence supports a theory of multiple (minimum two) independent parties affecting various voting
systems to rig the election in their preferred direction. Ohio had a plethora of different systems in use, but none of
the voting systems not shown had a statistically significant relationship.
Kansas 2014 Senate race
The two red lines show an upward trend on the graph and have a statistically significant linear relationship between
the %R vote and the total votes cast. The three brown lines do not.
I want to emphasize, as I always try to do, that statistics don’t prove vote fraud. These statistics show that patterns
exist in the data that correlate the type of electronic voting system in use with the %R vote changing with the total
votes cast.
Such patterns are examples of what we might expect to see if some voting systems were being sabotaged, but that
doesn’t mean that no other explanations are possible for these patterns. Voting machine manipulation is, in my
opinion, the most likely explanation for these patterns. The most common pattern supports Republican candidates,
but Democratic candidates are sometimes the beneficiary.
The only way to prove vote fraud is through a post-election audit demonstrating significant deviations from the
reported totals. That is what I want to see done. It is also recommended by experts in voting integrity, including 'The
American Voting Experience: Report and Recommendations of the Presidential Commission on Election
Administration' published in 2014.
Footnotes
I encourage others to download election results datasets from the various state governments and check my results
and check other elections to see if this pattern holds. If anyone does this, would you please contact me? I would
appreciate knowing my errors if I have made any. If I agree with your finding, I will update my tables and graphs to
the correct values. And if you concur with my analysis and would be willing to state this in writing, I could use that as
support for my legal case requesting access to voting records.
1. \begin{array}{l}H_0\;:\;lim_{n\;\uparrow}\frac{\sum_{i=1\;}^nRV_i}{\sum_{i=1\;}^nTV_i}\rightarrow p\\\end{array}
\begin{array}{l}H_a\;:\;lim_{n\;\uparrow}\frac{\sum_{i=1\;}^nRV_i}{\sum_{i=1\;}^nTV_i}\rightarrow\pm\infty\\\end{array}
Where
RVi = the Republican Vote Count for Precinct i
TVi = the Total Vote Count for Precinct i
n = the number of precincts
p = the unknown true proportion of the Republican vote
2. The tables displaying the total votes for the voting systems in Ohio, Wisconsin and Kansas with a sufficient
number of sufficiently large precincts along with the slope of the regression line(b1) and their respective p-values,
can be found below.
Table 1: 2014 Wisconsin gubernatorial race results by voting machine type
Code Voting System
No.
Wards
Sum
Votes
Slope b1
p-value for
b1
1
Dominion (Premier)-Accuvote-OS
259
268468
1.17764E-07 0.220034878
2
Dominion (Sequoia)/Command Central- Sequoia Insight &
AVC Edge
203
240142
4.92519E-05 6.72698E-09
5
ES&S DS200 & Automark
69
65257
-3.41414E05
6
ES&S DS200 & ExpressVote
40
49631
5.35097E-06 0.833096552
9
ES&S M100 & Automark
91
81579
4.83493E-06 0.838665696
13
None & Dominion (Sequoia)/Command Central-Edge
516
635835
1.09055E-06 0.924974015
18
Optech- Eagle & Dominion (Sequoia)/Command CentralEdge
197
225655
5.93071E-05 1.69045E-06
19
Optech- Eagle & ES&S Automark
408
376372
0.00014061
Voting Systems with too few sufficiently large Wards for an
individual analysis
49
40977
All WI Precincts with more than 500 votes cast
1832
1983916
0.336005978
5.07873E-09
4.03177E-05 1.79811E-08
Table 2: 2012 Ohio president race results by voting machine type
Code Voting System
No. Precincts Sum Votes Slope b1
p-value for b1
1
DRE & ADA: Premier AccuVote-TSX
2416
1718395
0.000102639 8.44E-07
2
DRE & ADA: ES&S iVotronic
1075
803636
2.77862E-05
3
OS: ES&S Model 100 ADA:ES&S AutoMark
1175
864669
-0.000207214 2.31E-13
4
OS: Premier Accuvote ADA:Premier AccuVote-TSX 44
27370
-9.92438E-05 0.563861
5
OS: Hart eScan ADAP: Hart eSlate
485
405483
-0.000136833 0.014345
6
OS:ES&S DS200 ADA: ES&S AutoMark
876
594351
0.000610095 1.25E-31
7
OS & ASA:Dominion Image Cast Evolution
23
14317
1.7199E-05
0.876427
6094
4428221
6.06622E-05
3.91E-05
All Ohio Precincts with more than 500 votes cast
Table 3: 2014 Kansas Senate race results by voting machine type
Code
Voting System
No. Precincts Sum Votes Slope b1
1
DRE ES&S
199
170636
6.23047E-05
2
DRE Premier
192
128191
0.000158864
3
Optical Scan - central ES&S
25
19828
-1.68265E-05
4
Optical Scan - Precinct ES&S
42
30633
-0.000103739
5
Optical Scan - Precinct - Premier
50
30730
0.000142676
6
Paper
1
517
All Kansas Precincts with more than 500 votes cast 509
Links to the election data:






KS Election Results
KS Voting Systems (pgs VI-7 to VI-11)
WI Election Results
WI Voting Systems
OH Election Results
OH Voting Systems
187
Add comment
380535
5.10737E-05
0.360351
PEOPLE IN THIS CONVERSATION

COMMENTS (12)

Sort by Oldest First

Sort by Latest First
Load Previous Comments

Guest - Hal
PERMALINK
STOP THE CROOKED MACHINES. USE PAPER BALLOTS ONLY LIKE CANADA DOES. NO MORE PROBLEMS.
about 7 months ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Ray
PERMALINK
Lets actually do something with this- sign the petition: http://wh.gov/ivvUC
about 7 months ago
0
LikeShare

Matt
PERMALINK
Hi there--thanks for sharing these results. I am watching this topic with great interest.
One question I had was, where are you obtaining vote data on such a granular level such that you can use # of
cumulative votes as a dimension? All of the publicly available election data I've seen from various sources so far
only seem to have the final totals, not snapshots along the way. Maybe I just don't know where to look for that level
of detail? Or is it only available by special request? Or, were you taking snapshots of the available data as the
election progressed?
thanks!
about 10 months ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Andrew
PERMALINK
If I understand your post correctly, I think there is a problem with the interpretation of the data. I believe you are
trying to suggest that precincts with larger populations should have voting percentages, with perhaps room for an
outlier or two or three, that trend very closely to the state-wide percentages for each party within the state. This is
the aforementioned "law of large numbers" that "ensures that the sample proportion will quickly approach the true
proportion" as the size of the sample proportion increases. So, since Scott Walker won 52.3% of the vote in 2014,
then in the biggest handful of districts he should have won approximately that percentage of the vote, and as you
look at districts in increasing order of size, the trend should be that the result in each individual precinct should get
closer and closer to the state-wide result. On first glance, you would have appeared to have discovered an important
anomaly with this data, because Walker's percentages start trending up after a certain point as the precincts get
bigger - suggesting that something is amiss. The implication is that his number in each successively larger precinct
gets further and further away - because it gets larger - from his "true" percentage, his state-wide number.
What is hidden here, and what severely undermines your point, is that - YES - Scott Walker's percentage in each
precinct does in fact get larger as the size of the precinct increases, after we pass the 600,000 to 800,000 vote
threshold - but that is because it is RECOVERING from being below where his state-wide number was (he is down
around 50% in the 1.2M range) to just about exactly 52.5% by the time we get to the biggest precincts (up around
the 2.5M range).
Now, I hate Scott Walker, and I hope he wakes up every morning to find that his dog, if he has one, has pooped his
bed, and I do find it curious that, looking at the data you chart here, apparently NO precinct recorded Walker taking
in less than 50% of the vote (I've been to Madison and, having been there, this does not seem possible). But I can't
say that the data you present here supports your conclusion, if my analysis is correct.
about 11 months ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Matt Harris
PERMALINK
I fully agree that we need a fool-proof way to make sure votes cast by real people perfectly match the tally that is
counted to determine our elections. I also applaud your desire to make data available and to audit it as well as
possible without revealing individual people's votes.
I also think it's interesting to see some of the machine-specific trends you show. That's a new twist on the results by
Choquette and Johnson, which I was also interested to study on my own. One additional piece of data that you don't
mention is voter registration data. I was able to reproduce Choquette/Johnson graphs with the election data, but I
was able also to show that by looking at the voter registration demographics, the trends in those cumulative voting
percentage graphs could be reasonably explained.
I have begun to reproduce your plots, starting with the 2014 Kansas Senate race. I see the same trend for data you
showed in the first plot above using cumulative fraction of total votes cast that are for the republican candidate, Pat
Roberts, when ordered by the total votes cast in each precinct. I downloaded the voter registration data from kssos
dot org / elections / elections_registration_voterreg dot asp. Since this data is provided by county, I could only plot
the data by county in a similar manner but ordered by number of registered voters in each county. The curve did not
match yours, which got me curious, but fortunately the voting data provides not only precinct but also county. When
I made the plot for election results by county rather than by precinct the curve matched the voter registration curve
very closely. This helped me to realize the reason for the curve upward in republican fraction of the vote for larger
precincts - precinct size does not correlate directly with the local population.
The largest outlier for the 2014 Kansas senate race was a precinct in MCPHERSON county called McPherson Ward
1 Precinct 1, which had the highest number of votes cast by far, but is in a far less populous county. This precinct
cast 1367 republican, 886 independent, and 118 libertarian votes - skewed drastically toward republican. Even
though it's the highest vote count precinct (2371 total votes cast), it's in a county that is only ranked 92 out of 105
counties for number of votes cast (10138 county votes). Voter registration records show that Republican
registrations make up 60% of the county registrations, which is in close alignment with the votes cast there.
There were several additional precincts in smaller counties with higher than normal votes cast that cause the
cumulative trend to curve upward when you rank them by number of votes cast in each *precinct*. When ordered by
number of votes cast in each *county*, there is a huge dip downward for republicans in the top 5 counties, as
expected - 'WYANDOTTE', 'DOUGLAS', 'SHAWNEE', 'SEDGWICK', and 'JOHNSON'.
I am not sure if this type of correlation using registration data can be applied to the analysis by voting machine type,
but it's possible that certain counties or areas used one manufacturer, and other counties used different
manufacturers. I think it is possible, as you admit in your discussion above, that the trends you have observed could
be fully explained using correlation with voter registration demographics. Please look into this while you continue to
be blocked in gaining access to records in your county. I may take some time to try and work on the Ohio data with
the very distinct trend in one specific machine type.
Best Wishes - Matt
about 11 months ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Evan Ravitz
PERMALINK
Dan Rather did his best investigation of Florida's 2000 voting debacle. Here he interviews workers at the printing
plant that made the problem Datavote ballots. They say they were forced to do several things
wrong: https://youtu.be/quFtd5P2Q8g
about 11 months ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Matthew Kaney
PERMALINK
I haven't read the entire article yet but I skimmed it looking for things you had to say about the machines,
specifically. I noticed you focused in on the actual voting machines though, like the Accuvote, and how easy they
are to hack. That voting machines are NOT the problem. Any weakness in the voting machines are relatively
inconsequential and if anything, serve as a smokescreen. The problem is the central tabulators. The voting
machines connect to a tabulator, which is basically just a server running Windows, and the tabulators connect to a
central tabulator. On these machines, it is possible to manipulate the database to rig the election, and cover your
tracks by modifying the audit log.
The implementation model for these voting systems shifts the responsibility for securing the servers properly on the
customer. For this reason, the people who run the elections, and are generally not technically savvy, are basically
responsible if one could prove that an election was rigged. And that is why those people are resistant to
investigations, not because they are the ones who committed the fraud. It's a nice little trick to cover one's tracks. If
you would like more information on any of this, feel free to email me.
about 12 months ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Drew Miller
PERMALINK
Worth investigating voting behavior before the installation of those types of machines - maybe suburban counties
(which tend to be richer and have republican election officials) are more likely to buy certain kinds of voting
equipment?
about 1 year ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - Jim Riley
PERMALINK
In Kansas, Clarkson overlooks that the largest precincts tend to be in more suburban areas. Because these areas
are more Republican, they tend to have higher turnout, which pushes them to the right in her charts. (ie if two
precincts have 2000 registered voters, the more Republican-leaning precinct will have more voters still living at the
residence that they were registered at (Republicans are more likely to be home owners, married, employed, etc., all
factors that lead to greater residential stability). And for the same reasons, they are more likely to actually vote.
Precinct sizes are not granular.They require a polling place such as a school. Once established, they are not easily
disestablished even if the population declines. The oldest areas of cities were developed before there was
widespread access to automobiles, so precincts might be based on walking distances. Early suburbs tended to
conform to the PLSS, and precincts might be a section or half section. Over time, some older housing stock may be
torn down, converted to commercial use, rented, etc., all that lead to fewer voters. Newer suburbs were developed
with an assumption of access to a car, for going to the store, school, or voting. If an area is growing, it is easier to
add a few more voting machines, than to establish a new polling place.
Clarkson could take any of the large Johnson County suburbs and will discover there is a very strong correlation
between votes cast and latitude or longitude. She could map the precincts in Sedgwick and Butler counties showing
how many votes were cast.
about 1 year ago
0
LikeShare

Guest - D. Kasdan
PERMALINK
Excellent analysis and (cautious) interpretation. It helps confirm my suspicions, unfortunately. Beyond my distaste
for the politics, this contributes to my loss of faith in the system. The electoral college is stupid enough, but to add
insult to injury with the potential rigging of the mechanics in the name of progress!
What's wrong with the old ink on the thumb method? Red for republican, blue for democrat. For more than just the
presidential election, we have 9 other digits to discolor. Take a photo of each person holding up their inky hands and
let democracy prevail.
about 1 year ago
https://www.statslife.org.uk/significance/politics/2288-how-trustworthy-are-electronic-voting-systems-in-the-us

Next Tweet
Follow
WikiLeaks @wikileaks
Verified account
Clinton took $100k cash from & was director of company that
gave money to ISIS thecanary.co/2016/07/29/par
…
docs: search.wikileaks.org/?query=lafarge
…
http://w w w.
https ://
i s - s tr i kes - as to ni s hi ng - par tn er s hi p- s ec r et - i s i s - s pons or - ti es - hi l l ar y- c l i nton/
&ex ac t_ phr as e= &a n y_ of= &e xc l u de _ wor ds = & doc u me nt_ dat e_s t ar t= &d oc u me nt_ dat e_ en d= &r el e as e d_d at e_s t ar t= &r el eas ed _d ate _e nd= &i nc l u de _e x ter n al _s o ur c es = T r ue& ne w _s ear c h= T r ue& or der _ b y= m os t_r el e va nt #r es ul ts
Paris strikes astonishing partnership with secret Isis sponsor tied to Hillary Clinton [EXCLUSIVE]...
You can get away with funding ISIS - if you're a giant corporation with political influence
thecanary.co



RETWEETS1,385
LIKES891
7:24 AM - 1 Aug 2016
1,385 retweets891 likes
Repl y
Retweet
1.4K
Li ke
891
More
1.
1.
Mohamed Badie El Bey @mobadielbey · 19m
19 mi nutes ag o
@wikileaks @TheCanarySays Giving money to ISIS ? This can realy put her in jail for centuries
10 retweets27 likes
Repl y
Retweet
10
Li ke
27
More
2. View other replies
™ @UnSocialMe · 18m
3.
18 minutes ago
@mobadielbey @wikileaks @TheCanarySays NOT WHEN YOU CONTROL THOSE THAT WOULD ARREST YOU
0 retweets6 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
6
More
4.
Nature's grasp @DeepInEuphoria · 8m
8 mi nutes ago
@UnSocialMe @mobadielbey @wikileaks The attourney general is Clinton's personal little beauty. It's all fucking set
up man, preplanned.
0 retweets2 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
2
More
2.
Tim Farley @tfarley1969 · 19m
19 minutes ago
@wikileaks @NafeezAhmed Somebody's in trouble --> @HillaryClinton
7 retweets17 likes
Repl y
Retweet
7
Li ke
17
More
3.
1.
Balambaras @wasabi46 · 20m
20 minutes ago
@wikileaks @NafeezAhmed still better than trump
0 retweets3 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
3
More
2. View other replies
3.
SouthernCali4Trump @NewWorldEnder · 19m
19 minutes ago
@wasabi46 @wikileaks @NafeezAhmed Brainwashed black man. Sad
0 retweets8 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
8
More
4. View other replies
5.
Balambaras @wasabi46 · 17m
17 minutes ago
@NewWorldEnder @wikileaks @NafeezAhmed not at all. Just don't see how a bankrupt business man can lead the
greatest nation on earth
0 retweets0 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
More
6. View other replies
7.
dave forden @KRJ237 · 16m
16 mi nutes ag o
@wasabi46 @NewWorldEnder @wikileaks @NafeezAhmed he's worth 5 billy lol. Brainwashed...
0 retweets3 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
3
More
4.
1.
Nic Noman @nicnoman · 20m
20 minutes ago
@wikileaks @TheCanarySays she helped create ISIS
0 retweets18 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
18
More
2.
View other replies
3. Show more
5.
1.
Politically Cleansed @TheCarbonator · 19m
19 minutes ago
@wikileaks @NafeezAhmed wow. Amazing. The media will ignore it. They care more about Trump tweets than The
Secretary of States corruption
4 retweets32 likes
Repl y
Retweet
4
Li ke
32
More
2. Show more
6.
ಠ_ಠ
❗jerxme @jerxme · 20m
@wikileaks @NafeezAhmed
20 mi nutes ag o
1 retweet15 likes
Repl y
Retweet
1
Li ke
15
More
7.
The Woke Progressive @wokeprogressive · 20m
@wikileaks @NafeezAhmed dammmmnnnn
0 retweets14 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
14
20 minutes ago
More
8.
1.
The Brick Layer @PolicyLord · 2m
2 minutes ago
@wikileaks @instapundit folks need to watch #ClintonCash if-if-if-if-if-if-if-if-if-if they want an idea of why I'm
#NeverFuckingEverHillary
3 retweets2 likes
Repl y
Retweet
3
Li ke
2
More
2.
Wendy @wendyvoss · 51s
51 s ec onds ago
@PolicyLord @hokiedokiemike @wikileaks @instapundit #NeverHillary #HillaryRottonClinton
0 retweets1 like
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
1
More
9.
MysTicWhiiT3 @cmurchisonn · 15m
15 mi nutes ago
@wikileaks This is YUGE, but like every story against her, mainstream media will ignore. @realDonaldTrump is
right she's #CrookedHillary
2 retweets3 likes
Repl y
Retweet
2
Li ke
3
More
10.
Judd Smolten @JuddSmolten · 18m
18 minutes ago
@wikileaks Oh #CrookedHillaryRottenClinton, your chickens will come home to roost sooner rather than later.
#MOSTCORRUPTPOLITICIANEVER
0 retweets3 likes
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
3
More
11.
Christopher G. Adamo @CGAdamo · 1m
1 minute ago
@wikileaks @ValLisitsa No surprise. Meanwhile, lib/Dems want to make this election about Trump being "unfair" to
islamists/muslim advocates!
0 retweets1 like
Repl y
Retweet
Li ke
1
More
12.
JadedByPolitics @JadedByPolitics · 2m
2 mi nutes ag o
@wikileaks and weapons, don't forget the weapons they were running to ISS through Libya ie; #Benghazi
L
http://archive.is/fpuMY
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/760118982393430016
File (hide): 1470044978982-0.gif (997.74 KB, 400x392, 50:49, hillary cocksucker.gif)
File (hide): 1470044978982-1.jpg (83.21 KB, 1024x790, 512:395, assange hillary isis.jpg)
[–]
▶
Assange: Hacked Emails Include Info On Hillary’s Arming of Jihadists in Syria Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon)
02:49:38 c2b800 No.6979160>>6979424 >>6979436 >>6979498 >>6979596 >>6979740 >>6979904 >>6980318 >>6980674 [Watch Thread]
THIS IS FUCKING HUGE
>Secretary of State Hillary Clinton knew that the US was sending arms from Libya to Syria back in 2011, a year before the
Benghazi consulate attacks.
>Hillary Clinton denied she knew about the weapons shipments during public testimony (under oath) in early 2013 after
the Benghazi terrorist attack.
>Senator Rand Paul questioned Hillary Clinton about this gun running program back in January 2013 during her testimony
on the Benghazi terrorist attack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jriU_cPU9Vk
>On Tuesday Julian Assange told Democracy Now that the Wikileaks DNC emails contains information on the weapons
shipments to Syria.
Julian Assange: So, those Hillary Clinton emails, they connect together with the cables that we have published of Hillary
Clinton, creating a rich picture of how Hillary Clinton performs in office, but, more broadly, how the U.S. Department of
State operates. So, for example, the disastrous, absolutely disastrous intervention in Libya, the destruction of the Gaddafi
government, which led to the occupation of ISIS of large segments of that country, weapons flows going over to Syria,
being pushed by Hillary Clinton, into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS, that’s there in those emails. There’s more than
1,700 emails in Hillary Clinton’s collection, that we have released, just about Libya alone.
https://archive.is/CK69r
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:51:22 c2b800 No.6979165>>6979184 >>6979185 >>6979187 >>6980920
I know most of /pol/ already knows this stuff but this is huge because the media is going to be forced to cover these new
leaks. This is too big to sweep under the rug.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:54:23 d5d419 No.6979184>>6979195 >>6979658
>>6979165
How many times have we heard that before? At this point you could release a video of Hillary shooting someone in the
head and people would still cry "muh wall".
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:54:35 3dae99 No.6979185>>6979195
>>6979165
Are these new leaks that surfaced recently? If so then the mods may want to sticky this
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:55:35 334629 No.6979187>>6979195
So this was the "big thing" they were building up towards with releasing the DNC email batch and the voicemails, pretty
interesting. Now the question is who will be the first "big guy" to start talking about this stuff. It definitely won't be Trump,
because, as far as I can tell, he likes for steam to build up around stuff like this before he comments on it (if in the position
to) so he doesn't look like he made it all up or just took it from one source.
>>6979165
>forced to cover these new leaks
Don't count on them to not try and ignore this, though.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:57:57 c2b800 No.6979195>>6979226
>>6979184
>>6979185
>>6979187
They were forced to cover the DNC leaks during the DNC even though they hated doing it. It was too damn newsworthy.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:58:50 05b34c No.6979196>>6980942
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:58:52 c2b800 No.6979197>>6979202 >>6979226 >>6979265 >>6979281
File (hide): 1470045532218.png (309.42 KB, 828x667, 36:29, Pure Coincidence 4564.png)
BTW, looks like Schlomo is trying to slide this.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:59:24 02c421 No.6979201
This better be the real one
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 02:59:26 05b34c No.6979202
>>6979197
Looks like they're trying to bury a dump of some halfchan caps of supposed fbi anon.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:07:38 334629 No.6979226>>6979812
>>6979195
The situation is always them being on the defensive. Guideline is, imho:
>Don't talk about it at all if nobody really notices
>If it gets big enough, talk around it, a small detail or derail the point
>If it's really big, multiple noteworthy people commenting on it, and the most of the facts are in the general knowledge do
short bits with "truth speakers" that actually know what's up and their own people commenting on it and spinning it
But still, I really doubt the anything close to the sentence "Clinton knew that the US was sending arms from Libya to Syria
back in 2011" will come out of the mouth of the mainstream media blowhards. And it doesn't have to, all it takes is some
smaller sites and blog to start spreading this so facebook fags find out. From there it's bowling season.
Also, it's to be assumed that anyone pro-Hillary in le current year is either bought and paid (including minorities) or literal
MK-ULTRA sleeper agent doing what they're told. This type of news is purely for anyone who needs another reason to
hate Clinton and possibly, eventually know where to stand in the case of supreme rigging during/after the election fallout
(no way in hell would Shillary lead in actual votes in the election vs Trump).
>>6979197
Maybe just the whole board. Gotta use that Clinton money wisely, like spam gay porn all day long on a weeb board.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:16:41 ae11b2 No.6979265
>>6979197
Some of Schlomo's less obvious bait threads use that tactic where the first post is an obvious one line shill reply. It's (as is
almost always the case), actually OP itself with a proxy/vpn ready.
Now you know why that first blatant shill reply is always so fast. It makes OP look good, and causes a chain of replies to
that reply that makes the thread get past the autoprune. You can almost guarantee that threads that have that first
obvious shill reply are actually shill threads themselves. Usually inane rageshit topics that we've seen a thousand times
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:18:53 259cc3 No.6979270
File (hide): 1470046733153-0.jpg (11.59 KB, 475x356, 475:356, obama-hillary-holding-hand….jpg)
File (hide): 1470046733153-1.jpg (11.25 KB, 332x220, 83:55, dead-gaddafi.jpg)
File (hide): 1470046733153-2.jpg (87.46 KB, 640x407, 640:407, isis-john-mccain-abu-mosa.jpg)
There's a Man goin' round, takin' names
And he decides who to free, and who to blame
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:19:18 d34436 No.6979272
Spread it
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:23:05 aa8835 No.6979281>>6979286 >>6979316 >>6979323
File (hide): 1470046985480.jpg (38.09 KB, 440x398, 220:199, 1427172281415.jpg)
>>6979197
/k/ here, we got spammed with the same shit too.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:24:25 39b1e0 No.6979286>>6979316
>>6979281
It was deleted pretty quick. Figures. They do that shit every time something major is up in the air.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:26:39 7351f3 No.6979294>>6979316
I mean not really huge news for us, just need to convince the other lemmings that Hillary needs to go to jail.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:29:03 3ecd4b No.6979305
YUGE
Exactly the bitter red pill I need to deliver to get people on the Trump train.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:30:26 259cc3 No.6979316>>6979323 >>6979330
>>6979281
Do you think it was targeted? Because it could be a site-wide.
>>6979286
>They do that shit every time something major is up in the air.
Can you feel the electricity in the air? That iron smell of blood?
>>6979294
>I mean not really huge news for us, just need to convince the other lemmings that Hillary needs to go to jail.
False. It's huge news period & for /pol/, because it's confirmation from an external source. Being able to prove something
is always a big deal, and the bigger the claims, the bigger the deal.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:32:08 8b9987 No.6979323>>6979350
>>6979281
>>6979316
It was some namefag who raged after /k/ BO removed tripcode. Said namefag is now shitting up /pol/ to elicit response.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:33:04 aa8835 No.6979330>>6979336 >>6979350
>>6979316
We haven't really had any groundbreaking threads like /pol/ does, so that leads me to believe it's site-wide.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:35:14 259cc3 No.6979336
>>6979330
That would point to an actor outside /pol/, imo. Because I'm guessing a nuclear spambot is simpler than a targeted one.
So if there's something on one board they don't like, just spam the whole site because "fuck it", it's not their backyard
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:39:51 259cc3 No.6979350
>>6979330
>>6979323
Come to think of it, the thread on Khan seems like another one they'd want to slide because there's so much dirt on him
as well as the desperate shilling about them being overkill.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:54:28 489643 No.6979424>>6979450
>>6979160 (OP)
>2013
Speaking of 2013, may be a coincidence but I wonder if one of these weapon shipments also contained sarin gas
canisters. Because around August 2013 was that chemical weapon attack in Syria.
Probably unrelated, but it's still curious to think about.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 03:56:56 8ca395 No.6979436
>>6979160 (OP)
The narrative has already been laid that Assad=Bad therefore all opposition to Assad=Good, same as:
Gaddaffi
Hussein
whoever was in charge of Ukraine when they wanted a coup there
whoever was in charge of Egypt when they wanted a coup there
whoever is in charge of Iran when they want a coup there
etc
etc
It will be as huge as the media lets it be.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:00:07 259cc3 No.6979450
[pop]YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>6979424
The more I learn, the more I believe with good reason that all of this stuff is connected. Benghazi, Libya, Syria, Petraeus,
the resignation by Def Sec Robert Gates & his tell-all book appropriately titled "Duty"… the whole fucking castle could
come crashing down
Makes me think of vid related
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:01:29 259cc3 No.6979462>>6979500
Breaking Just got this from one of the news wires I follow - "Russian defence ministry says a military helicopter has been
shot down in #Syria - Kremlin says five personnel on board have died"
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:08:35 08aa33 No.6979498>>6979511
>>6979160 (OP)
leftists will maintain that she had "good reason" to do what she did, without actually being able to articulate what that
reason was.
look and laugh, America. then get revenge-y.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:08:59 4c46ad No.6979500>>6979511
>>6979462
sorry friend but that broke a few hours ago if you have been following the syrian war. russias k/d is still pretty good
though, i do wonder what brought it down. maybe one of those saudi manpads that went missing a while back?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:10:25 259cc3 No.6979511>>6979542
>>6979498
Thanks for the demoralization post. It's a nice variation on the "old news" meme the Clintons have used since the 90s
>>6979500
I don't follow Syria very closely. I keep an eye out for Russia stuff, and know ISIS is declaring jihad on Putin or something
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:12:46 e29ae5 No.6979523
uh
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:14:57 75d3d1 No.6979533
Today is the day the ace pilot Gaddafi will be avenged.
inb4 the fucking media just ignores it, the debates can't come soon enough. Please mention this shit at the next rally
Trump, give it exposure!
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:15:41 e4f2de No.6979540>>6979557
Hard confirmation that Hersh was right would be nice. What's taking this queer so long?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:15:44 4c46ad No.6979542>>6979557
>>6979511
>know ISIS is declaring jihad on Putin or something
par for the course, who haven't they declared a jihad on ;^]
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:16:05 28b139 No.6979546>>6979557 >>6979563 >>6980076
But doesn't everyone know that the US government arms and funds terrorists?
Or is that just us?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:18:47 259cc3 No.6979557>>6979563
>>6979542
>par for the course, who haven't they declared a jihad on ;^]
The house of Saud, or for that matter, Israel
>>6979540
>What's taking this queer so long?
He's dangling the sword of Damocles over them. The DNC Leak ensured that he's a hot topic for the news outlets for a
good long while - not forever. He's been planning this a long fucking time I bet
>>6979546
>But doesn't everyone know that the US government arms and funds terrorists?
You have no idea what confirmation is worth and how much the elite fear sunlight. They are fine with their secrets being
known to people they can discredit or ignore. Bring it out into the bright spotlight, and they are in trouble
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:19:58 b6d976 No.6979561
What emails?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:20:12 4c46ad No.6979563>>6979575
>>6979546
it has been suspected by fringe media, never mainstream. the line is always 'rebels' or 'moderates'.
'know' being the key word here. now it can be proven with hard evidence.
>>6979557
i know i was being facetious
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:23:23 28b139 No.6979575>>6979597 >>6979622
>>6979563
But pretty much every /pol/ack(or was it /new/sman at the time) worth his salt knew that the NSA domestic spying was
going on the only thing that it revealed to people like us was that it was the NSA doing it rather than another Alphabet.
Shit like this is just obvious.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:25:29 aafdb9 No.6979586>>6979949
File (hide): 1470050729238.jpg (152.21 KB, 600x822, 100:137, 1463625844042.jpg)
On a scale from no one will give a fuck to Hillary's going to prison how big of a deal is this?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:27:02 d27f93 No.6979593>>6979651 >>6979666
File (hide): 1470050823593.jpg (63.28 KB, 1920x1080, 16:9, dfV7uMK.jpg)
It's fair to say that Assange is on team Trump, thank you.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:27:46 61e676 No.6979596
>>6979160 (OP)
If we tie this together to 'Jihadis also used these weapons to attack Europe in terrorist attacks' this may get more
headway, as well - We can indirectly or directly blame Hillary for the death of European people this year.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:28:22 259cc3 No.6979597>>6979616
>>6979575
>Shit like this is just obvious.
Why do you seem to have such an ardent interest in minimizing this story? Are you just autistic? Or do you really, really
want it to go away?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:28:31 cd1abc No.6979598>>6979607
HEROES GATHER TO DEFEAT THE BEAST
IT IS JUST LIKE JAPANESE ANIME!
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:30:07 259cc3 No.6979607>>6980117
File (hide): 1470051007651.jpg (87.05 KB, 800x453, 800:453, 1420902466887.jpg)
>>6979598
It's not going away, shill.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:31:37 28b139 No.6979616>>6979634 >>6979846
>>6979597
Oh no i'm just fucking depressed that it's been common knowledge on here since forever but the very idea of it is
considered a wacky conspiracy theory for normalfags.
But yeah proof would ensure a Trump victory 100%
Nobody besides Niggers are going to vote for a person who arms what the public have been conditioned(Correctly) to
think is the fucking devil.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:32:42 4c46ad No.6979622
>>6979575
>Shit like this is just obvious.
and now we have evidence to prove the obvious to the naysayers and doubters.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:33:04 23a24e No.6979625>>6979634
File (hide): 1470051184908.jpg (59.87 KB, 700x700, 1:1, Autistic rage.jpg)
MFW normalfags don't care
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:34:44 259cc3 No.6979634
[pop]YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>6979616
>Oh no i'm just fucking depressed that it's been common knowledge on here since forever but the very idea of it is
considered a wacky conspiracy theory for normalfags.
That's just the way the world works. Be happy that once in a while we get lucky
>>6979625
>one micro-shekel has been deposited to your CitiBank account
you & the cunt will be sacrificed on our altar, faggot
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:37:20 8c4839 No.6979651
>>6979593
Fairer to say he's a #neverhillary, there's no doubt in my mind that if he found something juicy about Trump in a couple
years, he'd leak that too.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:37:21 8e2120 No.6979652
File (hide): 1470051441404.jpg (199.41 KB, 862x1000, 431:500, Abstract_3.jpg)
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:38:59 28b139 No.6979658>>6979945
>>6979184
Nah man even though all her evil shit is obvious to us the proles can explain away anything to complicated/non-relatable
as propaganda and deny it. Or they'll just ignore it because they don't understand it.
Everyone can understand the concept of Hillary funding ISIS.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:41:26 28b139 No.6979666>>6979688 >>6979693 >>6981123
>>6979593
He might actually be a /pol/ack he linked to 8chan once
https://twitter.com/infinitechan/status/592527619549040641
and has claimed that Wikileaks is being targeted by a Jewish conspiracy
https://archive.is/eJuMl
Not to to mention that he's whiter than any of us here.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:48:46 259cc3 No.6979688>>6979750 >>6981123
File (hide): 1470052126594.jpg (95.46 KB, 930x800, 93:80, CoGCt6iWAAAQ2NT.jpg large.jpg)
>>6979666
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 04:50:26 63adb6 No.6979693
>>6979666
hail satan
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:07:14 739316 No.6979740>>6979807
>>6979160 (OP)
We need a smoking gun email for the normies that watch tv news to be convinced that hillary broke the law.
I was talking to a couple of my relatives the other day and asked if they had heard anything about the DNC email leaks.
"No, but did you see on TV all the horrible things Trump said?"
There are too many fucking voters who get their information from the fucking TV and no where else.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:09:54 d88ae4 No.6979750
File (hide): 1470053394385.jpg (46.4 KB, 720x629, 720:629, 1445629665651.jpg)
>>6979688
>Not WikiKeks
Other than that, breddy gud.
Also checked
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:30:37 259cc3 No.6979807
>>6979740
>There are too many fucking voters who get their information from the fucking TV and no where else.
Yeah, the aging boomer demographic. I hate to say it but the best way to counter them might be to motivate voters age
18-50 who can use the fucking internet to vote for Trump or against Clinton
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:32:35 97f70b No.6979812>>6980176
>>6979226
This is classic Clintonian strategy.
1.) Deny "X" ever happened.
2.) Admit that something happened but that the accusations are inaccurate, overblown or not relevant.
3.) Admit that what you're being accused of actually did occur but that it's old news and has already been explained.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:44:48 4c2ce9 No.6979846>>6979847 >>6979887
>>6979616
I'ts always hard to talk to nories about this stuff they just tune out if when they hear something that doesn't feel good
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:45:00 4c2ce9 No.6979847
>>6979846
*normies
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 05:57:36 28b139 No.6979887>>6980052
File (hide): 1470056256440.jpg (136.48 KB, 901x706, 901:706, 1463605573429.jpg)
>>6979846
They also have that "Why do I need to know that or care? There's nothing that you or I can do about it, so just go with the
flow man" mentality.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:03:46 d838ff No.6979904
File (hide): 1470056626708.png (653.12 KB, 1973x743, 1973:743, hill truck.png)
>>6979160 (OP)
wew. Now this cartoon becomes even more appropriate.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:06:17 000000 No.6979909>>6979925 >>6979936 >>6979941 >>6980052 >>6980261
Nothing will happen. Mainstream media is shilling for Hillary, including foreign media.
>muh vagina
>muh feminism
>muh first female us prez
>muh equality
Liberals are have SJW orgasms over that fucking bitch
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:09:12 775067 No.6979925
>>6979909
Ya hear anons? Nothing will come of this! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!
SO STOP LOOKING INTO IT
:^)
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:11:24 259cc3 No.6979936>>6980261
File (hide): 1470057085000-0.jpg (11.36 KB, 255x144, 85:48, 1469845958366.jpg)
File (hide): 1470057085001-1.jpg (9.41 KB, 247x255, 247:255, 1469219315146.jpg)
>>6979909
I hope you lose everyone you love
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:12:50 0902cb No.6979941>>6979949 >>6979984
>>6979909
This tbh. She's got so much dirt on her, the fact that she's a candidate shows that the establishment just doesnt care.
>they cant cover all this up!
Yes they can, they just need to not say anything about it. If China nuked Japan tomorrow, and the media didnt say
anything, it would be a long time before we even know what happened. They can cover up important stuff just as they can
cover up unimportant stuff
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:14:04 43e3ff No.6979945
>>6979658
I was talking to a co-worker a few days ago about the election and the leaks. For twenty or so minutes I went into explicit
detail about her corruption, her support of terrorism, dnc's rigging the system against bernie and the numerous lies told at
the convention.
>I don't care.
>I'm gay and Trump hates the LGBQT community.
Killable NPC mod when?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:14:56 8d6fbe No.6979949
>>6979586
/pol/ cares
When you have pics of Mccain wining and dining with Al Bahgdaddi, existing knowledge of current ISIS supplies and
failed rebel arming, people don't care.
Especially as muh Benghazi!!! investigation already popped this story.
And to end it all, its very simple to point that the weapons were given when Assad was the bigger threat than ISIS and
halted when they got to be to evil.
Alternately, the truth can be pointed and the US was running control on the Saudi weapons exchange, thus throwing
Saudi Arabia further under the bus as part of the Yinion plan to take their northern area.
Yinion and PNAC are both in full effect, and have shown no signs of being stopped.
>>6979941
Given how many times my rad tracking site of choice has gone down, I would not be the least surprised to find out nukes
are used regularly in many applications, war and industry.
Or that rad releases are very common from shitty aging CIA pushed crap.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:16:24 259cc3 No.6979958>>6979981 >>6979993
File (hide): 1470057384283-0.jpg (43.09 KB, 960x540, 16:9, trump-list--3-.jpg)
File (hide): 1470057384283-1.jpg (69.58 KB, 581x371, 83:53, trump-list--10-.jpg)
THE SHILLING HAS BEGUN
PREPARE FOR INFLUX OF DEMORALIZATION & "NO ONE CARES" >(1) POSTS
THIS BITCH IS GOING DOWN
NSA WHISTLEBLOWER BELIEVES THE LEAKS ARE FROM THE INSIDE
http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2016/07/31/exclusive-nsa-architect-agency-clintons-deleted-emails/
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon)
06:16:26 821f07 No.6979959>>6979972 >>6979973 >>6979982 >>6979993 >>6979995 >>6980002 >>6980035 >>6980052
This isnt huge
No one will care and it will have no impact
This shouldn't be stickied, you lessen the value of stickies with these types of threads
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:18:54 827145 No.6979972>>6979983
>>6979959
>Proof of a presidential candidate committing treason
>No impact
wew
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:19:05 39b1e0 No.6979973
File (hide): 1470057546027.jpg (21.57 KB, 260x435, 52:87, whore feelings.jpg)
>>6979959
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:21:13 8d9390 No.6979981>>6980007 >>6980019 >>6980024
>>6979958
What's the possibility of this breaching the large media narratives? I just don't see how this would finally be the thing to
bring hilldog down. By all means keep pushing this, but I'm losing hope that we will see her imprisoned before Trump's
coronation.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:21:22 ff930c No.6979982>>6980285
File (hide): 1470057682861.jpg (167.47 KB, 1292x546, 646:273, two kinds of people.jpg)
>>6979959
Shillbot detected.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:21:27 0902cb No.6979983
>>6979972
>implying hillary hasnt commited treason before
>implying she wont get off this time like literally every other time
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:21:34 775067 No.6979984
>>6979941
Nigger, the establishment acting counter to Hillary was never a possibility and this isn't meant to get Hillary out. The
Government is either with the program, paid for or off or dead. Especially after King Niggers replacement of any relevant
head of military or agencies. They are all in bed with each other and with the agency that cannot be accounted for as well
for that matter. This was never about them, however.
This is another thing for Trump to add on top to the heap of Shillarys no-no's. This is for all the individuals who are looking
for Trump and alternative media for their information, or even facebook posts for that matter. And if push comes to shove,
these are the type of things that push hotblooded americano's from typing angry facebook posts to getting their buddies
together to form a militia.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:23:10 259cc3 No.6979992>>6980014 >>6980019 >>6980021 >>6980028
File (hide): 1470057790269-0.jpg (136.96 KB, 933x622, 3:2, CoqBrvQXgAAEFrQ.jpg large.jpg)
File (hide): 1470057790269-1.jpg (43.25 KB, 640x427, 640:427, julian-assange-1.jpg)
File (hide): 1470057790269-2.jpg (9.43 KB, 255x144, 85:48, 1469846813738-1.jpg)
NSA Whistleblower: Agency Has All of Clinton’s Deleted Emails
PHILADELPHIA – The National Security Agency (NSA) has “all” of Hillary Clinton’s deleted emails and the FBI
could gain access to them if they so desired, William Binney, a former highly placed NSA official, declared in a
radio interview broadcast on Sunday.
Speaking as an analyst, Binney raised the possibility that the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s server was
done not by Russia but by a disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker concerned about Clinton’s compromise of national
security secrets via her personal email use.
Binney was an architect of the NSA’s surveillance program. He became a famed whistleblower when he resigned on
October 31, 2001, after spending more than 30 years with the agency.
Binney referenced testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2011 by then-FBI Director Robert S.
Mueller in which Meuller spoke of the FBI’s ability to access various secretive databases “to track down known and
suspected terrorists.”
Stated Binney: “Now what he (Mueller) is talking about is going into the NSA database, which is shown of course in the
(Edward) Snowden material released, which shows a direct access into the NSA database by the FBI and the CIA. Which
there is no oversight of by the way. So that means that NSA and a number of agencies in the U.S. government also have
those emails.”
“So if the FBI really wanted them they can go into that database and get them right now,” he stated of Clinton’s emails as
well as DNC emails.
Binney referenced testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2011 by then-FBI Director Robert S.
Mueller in which Meuller spoke of the FBI’s ability to access various secretive databases “to track down known and
suspected terrorists.”
Stated Binney: “Now what he (Mueller) is talking about is going into the NSA database, which is shown of course in the
(Edward) Snowden material released, which shows a direct access into the NSA database by the FBI and the CIA. Which
there is no oversight of by the way. So that means that NSA and a number of agencies in the U.S. government also have
those emails.”
“So if the FBI really wanted them they can go into that database and get them right now,” he stated of Clinton’s emails as
well as DNC emails.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:23:23 7a03fb No.6979993
>>6979958
And who, are you; to leak my emails here?
When I am the, only one, stronk womyn in the current year?
And now they cuck, and now they cuck
To signal oh so high
>>6979959
Kek
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:23:27 8096de No.6979995
File (hide): 1470057807768.png (268.72 KB, 599x361, 599:361, 1421329661657.png)
>>6979959
(((1)))
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:23:50 16e4f9 No.6980002>>6980024
>>6979959
You'll hang for treason lad
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:24:19 259cc3 No.6980007>>6980058
>>6979981
We aren't going to have a "debate". You're ID is filtered and I can no longer see your posts unless I choose to unhide
them. Fuck off and die.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:25:04 16e4f9 No.6980014>>6980024
>>6979992
Is the NSA our trump card?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:25:48 cf13f1 No.6980018>>6980042 >>6980096
File (hide): 1470057948644.jpg (51.33 KB, 363x326, 363:326, 1463793251739.jpg)
Anons we really got to get on to some method to prevent/mitigate voter fraud, Hillary's actual base among voters is turning
out to be less and less than what is reported by her and the media day after day, it's becoming so blatant and with these
leaks, only more so, the only reasonable way she can win it at this point is to rig the election, the 2 options are getting on
Trump to outwardly criticize Clinton's connections with E-voting companies to make it a big story or do what brit anons did
during Brexit and ask for paper and pen voting
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:25:54 775067 No.6980019>>6980058
>>6979981
>her imprisoned before Trump's coronation
Why would she be imprisoned? Do you not understand that they need Clinton in, even if she's almost as brain-dead as
her husband in name only? With all the cash "donated" to the CF and her PACs and the possible losses come Trump,
there 's a huge investment. Not to mention all the other non-monetary plans. Indictment was never an option.
>>6979992
wew
>FBI could gain access to them if they so desired
All it takes is another "disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker", lads and we'll get to see all those e-mails concerning "Yoga
Lessons" and "Family Dinners".
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:26:49 55778d No.6980021
>>6979992
God I hope that the turbocucks in the house and senate decide to stop being butthurt about Trump crashing their party
with no survivors and go after Hillary over this shit.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:27:09 8d6fbe No.6980024>>6980049
>>6979981
Too breach the narrative, you must first have actionable evidence.
Not the /pol/ knows stuff, but actual parts.
Given how treason is designed in the US, this is impossible on purpose.
THat is, Hillary treason does not and can not exist within the framework of the US and be anything other than Trump is a
xenophobe.
You would have to expand the definition of traitor for it to work, but doing so also means that all previous actions are
invalid for the offense still.
>>6980002
As a point, the more treason is thrown around like this, the less impact it has.
At this point it is /pol/'s misogony cry.
>>6980014
If it is, things have really gone to shit when you are busy relying upon flagrant constitutional violators run by kikes as a US
KGB done right to help you.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:27:45 7a03fb No.6980028
>>6979992
Julian Targereyen, first of his Name; Lord of Leaklands, King of the Redditors and Gaifags. Long May
He Reign.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:28:59 775067 No.6980035>>6980045 >>6980047
>>6979959
wtf I hate the mods now
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:29:58 259cc3 No.6980042>>6980059 >>6980344
>>6980018
Nice desperate slide, and it's very considerate of you to corroborate that most posters concerned about election fraud
have no intent of intelligently discussing the matter, or producing actionable results, but merely wish to frighten & distract.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:30:21 8d6fbe No.6980045
>>6980035
The mods are probably fighting over the Kike, trump, I need more thin and crispy, and servers are up factions.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:30:32 b6d976 No.6980047
>>6980035
This is like the bananameme.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:31:18 16e4f9 No.6980049>>6980053
>>6980024
>hurrdurr i'm a fucking retard
Kill yourself.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:31:42 489643 No.6980052
>>6979887
Consider that the U.S-Russia situation is leading to a Cuban missile crisis tier event, that's the most dangerous mentality
to have right about now. That apathy could lead to the death of millions.
>>6979909
That's why the internet is the real battleground to spread information like this. Render their efforts useless by becoming a
faster, more intriguing source for people to read.
>>6979959
CTR pls, you're not even trying.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:32:16 8d6fbe No.6980053>>6980057
>>6980049
Your ability to communicate is already achieving that.
Or is it I am once more close {{moshi}}
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:32:33 16e4f9 No.6980057>>6980091
>>6980053
Kill yourself.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:32:36 8d9390 No.6980058>>6980089
>>6980019
I'm saying that the only way we will see her in an orange jumpsuit is if/when Trump wins. It takes a willing AG to pursue
this.
>>6980007
Remember when we could talk about things without always being called a shill? I do.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:32:37 cf13f1 No.6980059>>6980096
File (hide): 1470058357635.jpg (37.09 KB, 500x375, 4:3, 1469495974168.jpg)
>>6980042
I'll make my own thread if you want, I thought the prospect of voter fraud was relevant to the fact that Hillary has a
snowball in hell's chance of winning an honest and fair race when it comes out that she has connections to arming ISIS,
but I guess going even slightly offtopic is being a shill nowadays
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:33:51 259cc3 No.6980064
File (hide): 1470058431901.jpg (11.75 KB, 255x180, 17:12, 1469767180295.jpg)
>mfw can't see all these rapid shills earning their $.12 per post
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:35:00 fa9c41 No.6980070
Expect a dindu to take the headlines, this gets swept under the rug.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:35:50 a19e7b No.6980075>>6980078 >>6980084 >>6980571 >>6980675
But where are the email? When is he gonna drop them? Because now seems like a good time since Hillary is gaining
momentum in the polls.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:36:16 051a42 No.6980076>>6980079 >>6980091
>>6979546
the democrats have effectively pinned all of that shit on Bush by turning the gop into controlled opposition.
they ran two shitty candidates against him on purpose so they could focus 8 full years, ie all the time spent in high school
and college for most people, on anti-right propaganda.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:37:36 b6d976 No.6980078>>6980087
>>6980075
Maybe he wants them to bomb an embassy first.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:37:45 7a03fb No.6980079
>>6980076
Too bad all that did was make us hate cucks.
gg jews, rush b cyka blyat
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:38:05 259cc3 No.6980081>>6980093
[pop]YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Do your worst, shills
The Sun is out
Noon approaches
The hour of the shortest shadow
All will be revealed
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:38:18 cf13f1 No.6980084>>6980096
>>6980075
He's got to time it just right anon, blow the load too early and you give the Media a good reason to cover something else
and bury it, He's got a few other tricks up his sleeve too I suspect, but he's not ready to let the cat out of the bag on
everything just yet, strategically release the info out at a time that the maximum amount of people can see it.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:38:31 7a03fb No.6980087>>6980110
>>6980078
So what does Hillary have to offer me, Mr shilly?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:39:03 775067 No.6980089>>6980092
>>6980058
True enough and another good reason to look forward to a Trump win. Maybe he'll reinstate Insane Asylums because the
Cunt's too insane for
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:39:16 8d6fbe No.6980091
>>6980057
Can you provide me a personal demonstration how?
>>6980076
And the Contras, Tigers, Shining path, revolutionaries, etc…
Of the cold war.
The only ones beleiving we don't arm terrorists are the ones with 9/11 murals on their tail gates with the words "I learned
all I need to know on 9/11"
Which is also half the tv viewership thanks to Fox news.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:39:19 775067 No.6980092
>>6980089
…your average prison.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:39:21 cf13f1 No.6980093>>6980096
File (hide): 1470058761658.png (611.42 KB, 640x480, 4:3, 1430484186889-1.png)
>>6980081
>Do I fit in /pol? look I called everyone a shill!
This is what summer brings us
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:40:12 16e4f9 No.6980096>>6980344
>>6980093
>>6980084
>>6980059
>>6980018
Fuck off retard
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:44:09 b6d976 No.6980110
>>6980087
No friend. Assange is living in the Ecuadorian Embassy.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:45:25 1b86a0 No.6980117>>6980129
>>6979607
I snorted biscuits and gravy. Great maymay
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:47:23 259cc3 No.6980129>>6980199
File (hide): 1470059243634.jpg (114.78 KB, 800x1200, 2:3, kjn;lj.jpg)
>>6980117
kys
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:56:56 cee0a3 No.6980169>>6980231 >>6980842 >>6980877 >>6980960
File (hide): 1470059816929.png (100.81 KB, 700x700, 1:1, new jesus.png)
Fuck the defeatests, meme this woman into a prison cell /pol/.
oc pepe for you.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 06:57:28 b33ece No.6980176>>6980276
>>6979812
Don't forget "Deflect the blame to your accusers or a 'vast right-wing conspiracy' against you" at each step.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:02:19 cd7dd8 No.6980198>>6980237
File (hide): 1470060139330.png (13.66 KB, 921x474, 307:158, 1451804475496.png)
>Hillary and the Democunts think they can get away with it because they know anyone revealing it would cause unrivaled
chaos and destabilization that it would completely shatter the status quo
>Assange might just be the madman who actually does it
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:02:25 1b86a0 No.6980199>>6980244
File (hide): 1470060145988.jpg (744.47 KB, 1280x1280, 1:1, dxcIksw.jpg)
>>6980129
Didn't intend to hurt your precious fee fees, my special snowflake. Here's a picture of your mummy for your troubles.
On topic: I agree with the earlier poster that Trump will wait for this to get some traction before dropping a soundbite on
the issue. Especially with all the articles of accusations (with evidence) that he has vetted and published to try to dominate
this week's news cycle. What we can do is digest, reconstitute, repackage, and distribute this information. If we do our job,
then somebody of Milo's caliber of name recognition will accuse first, and then more, to the point where MSM has to cover
it and Trump can nonchalantly discuss as established fact that Hillary used USA money to fund ISIS.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:07:59 051a42 No.6980231>>6980241 >>6980243
>>6980169
she deserves much worse than a prison cell.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:09:17 489643 No.6980237
>>6980198
If it means stopping Hillary, it's all worth it.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:09:50 7a03fb No.6980241
>>6980231
And all of them were drunk upon the wine of her fornication
This shit will be like Nuremburg, but even worse. Because we'll actually be putting the entire thing on trial.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:10:09 cd7dd8 No.6980243>>6980276
>>6980231
If half the accusations against her are true, she deserves a cold dark prison cell. If all the accusations against her are true,
she deserves to be executed, broadcasted live for the world to see, on a firing line. High caliber. The kind that would pop
her head like a grape.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:10:11 259cc3 No.6980244>>6980283
[pop]YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>6980199
Oh look, it can only be Applied Memetics!
or maybe Sinead - get raped by fear niggers if it's you
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:11:31 a75909 No.6980261>>6980278
>>6979936
>>6979909
Same thing I think.. No one is voting for Hilldabeast. They are voting for the D. As long as she is not in cuffs they will vote
for who ever is the Democrat. If someone shot her tomorrow, the exact same amount of people would vote for the new
replacement. She could drink the blood of an aborted baby on camera and she would still get 45+ percent of the vote.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:13:11 8d6fbe No.6980276
>>6980176
Its pretty easy to do when they keep fucking up and not going for actual prosecution and conviction.
>>6980243
And if we based things on accusation, /pol/ is all going to join her.
Facts man, facts.
THis isn't Reddit no matter how much you want.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:13:50 259cc3 No.6980278>>6980298
File (hide): 1470060830855.png (44.74 KB, 532x557, 532:557, 1469137144656.png)
>>6980261
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:14:35 1b86a0 No.6980283
File (hide): 1470060876164.jpg (875.43 KB, 2166x3232, 1083:1616, 1469899576536.jpg)
>>6980244
I dunno who you think that I am, but I am nobody, anon. I honestly didn't intend to trigger you with my wrongthink. Friends
and we can meme Trump into first God Emperor of milky way together?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:14:42 a75909 No.6980285>>6980306 >>6980342
>>6979982
HOLY shit is that real? I sperg when I see people videotaping wrong. Let alone the rule of a third, that they need to teach
everyone in childhood.. REEEeee
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:16:34 a75909 No.6980298>>6980309
>>6980278
Veteran and current Police officer with DNA test of 98% German ancestry.. Try again Goldburgenstein.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:17:24 fa147e No.6980306
>>6980285
has nothing to do with teaching. Drop your inner PC for a moment, because the simple explanation here is that the
democrats are dumb (and probably foreign; look at the colour of their wrists.)
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:18:22 259cc3 No.6980309>>6980322 >>6980447
Gee, I wonder why the "Ashes & Echoes" shill is back to making occasional appearances at the very same time that
shilling intensifies….is this a cohencidence?
>>6980298
Have another (You), buy yourself something nice
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:19:51 409bbb No.6980318
File (hide): 1470061191716.webm (3.17 MB, 854x480, 427:240, Assange_ Hillary's disast….webm) [play once] [loop]
>>6979160 (OP)
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:20:19 775067 No.6980322>>6980333 >>6980363 >>6980461
>>6980309
Wrong thread, lad. That's in the Melania nudes one. Although you are right, hadn't seen the sadcunt in a long time.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:21:42 259cc3 No.6980333
>>6980322
I was pointing it out to anyone who might be in both threads
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:22:59 8d6fbe No.6980342>>6980363
>>6980285
You notice though for Obama, everyone is touching the record button, and somebody is just holding up a green plastic
frame over his collar?
As well, the arms are all in a different state of focus.
Not to mention just barely clearing the head line, while the Trump one is shot low and close.
It gives the impression that Trump has a number of people, but count heads.
Trump is 2 x 7, Obama is 3 x 9.
There's a lot of kikery in that comparison.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:23:00 d6b76a No.6980344>>6980353
>>6980042
>>6980096
^KIKES
we definitely have to do SOMETHING concerning this
even something simple like archiving and collecting all the proof that no one shows up for hillary events
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:24:43 259cc3 No.6980353
>>6980344
Start your own thread, nigger. None of you shills ever offers to make a thread about fraud or offers any documentation,
statistical or forensic evidence, or reccomendations on how to combat fraud. The material is fucking out there. You have
no excuse other than being a goddamn shill.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:25:49 a75909 No.6980363>>6980433 >>6980474
>>6980322
>>6980342
Also notice the Trump video people have him in frame and besides the empty square the Obama fucks have him barely
just the top of his head.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:34:47 8d6fbe No.6980433>>6980474
File (hide): 1470062087370.jpg (206.51 KB, 1292x546, 646:273, 1470057682861.jpg)
>>6980363
Also all the arms in the way, In fact
Red has a shot of arms on screen when none exist, green isn't even holding a phone, and blue has a photo that is
impossible to obtain with a camera phone much less from that spot.
The photo proper is also shot wrong, coming from the left and not the traditional straight onto the podium as with Trump.
It cuts out the other person visible on the left side and in right hand cameras.
If I had to guess here, somebody from the AV staff grabbed the pic and messed with it to make Trump look better.
It has all the marks of editing and when compared fits the classic manipulated shots to watch for.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:36:47 7a03fb No.6980447>>6980474
>>6980309
Niggah, I'm not a shill. And I've never left.
I'm just deploying in threads that are shit instead of this one. Since it's actually worth a damn.
Carry on with your salt mining.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:39:22 7a03fb No.6980461>>6980474
>>6980322
Stop lying. I hate it when you lie.
I never left.
I've just been lurking.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:40:11 8def48 No.6980462>>6980474
woman's suffrage was a mistake
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:41:20 259cc3 No.6980474>>6980501 >>6980520 >>6980521
File (hide): 1470062480533.jpg (47.9 KB, 640x1136, 40:71, ClUgz3MWIAA6ZvO.jpg large.jpg)
>>6980363
>>6980433
>>6980447
>>6980461
>>6980462
Shill harder, kikes
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:42:56 06dc19 No.6980483>>6980510 >>6980569
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/760118982393430016
Uh oh.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:43:18 0675e9 No.6980485>>6980742
Nice. This isn't the whole payload though. Just the third salvo. The fourth will be a double whammy euromaiden/Africa we
already know she allowed the girls to be made slaves, what we don't know is she is actually complicit in that huge mall
attack
Fifth salvo will be emails about nice truckman before it happened.
6th salvo and final salvo will be emails discussing "dealing with" the assassinated DNC stafferfag.
How do I know this? Kek wills it
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:45:02 775067 No.6980501>>6980516 >>6980532
>>6980474
M8, I doubt he's a kike, at worst he's one of the brit/pol/ 22st cunts many personas at best just a dummy.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:46:31 775067 No.6980510>>6980527 >>6980758 >>6980824
File (hide): 1470062791871.png (344.77 KB, 489x605, 489:605, tweet.PNG)
>>6980483
Here we fucking go, lads.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:47:21 259cc3 No.6980516
>>6980501
Brits, kike, same difference, both into banking :^)
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:47:40 7a03fb No.6980520
>>6980474
Whatever.
I'm right and you know it.
This is going to bring the entire castle down, and soon we'll all be suffering in our own personal hells!
That's the only thing that could happen, has ever happened or ever will happen. ETERNAL. ALL
CONSUMING. WITHOUT END!
ALL NIGHT LONG!!
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:47:49 a75909 No.6980521
>>6980474
I have been a "Old fag" on 4chun since 06 (hate chan terminology/hivemind name calling).. And literal newfag shills are
calling out people. I am a Lurker sorry, I have prob posted 40 times since 2006.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:47:53 b1cb5e No.6980523>>6980545
File (hide): 1470062873359.jpg (134.37 KB, 640x1097, 640:1097, image.jpg)
Well, let's see what's going on in the world today…
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:48:37 c304ec No.6980527
>>6980510
Oh fuck, its real.
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/760118982393430016
http://archive.is/fpuMY
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:48:45 7284ab No.6980529>>6980558
File (hide): 1470062925802.png (109.27 KB, 735x504, 35:24, Trumps winning honest.png)
derrrrrp
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:48:51 7a03fb No.6980532
>>6980501
Whatever.
I'm right and you know it.
I'm not from brit/pol/. If you knew anything about me, at all; you'd know where I'm from, but nothing
else.
UNDOXABLE.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:50:44 259cc3 No.6980545
File (hide): 1470063044642.jpg (36.81 KB, 515x499, 515:499, chuck muh sbux goyim.jpg)
>>6980523
Thank you for Correcting the Record
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:52:27 a19e7b No.6980554
File (hide): 1470063148103.jpg (47.77 KB, 466x406, 233:203, Cn-h8sBWAAA_Vq1.jpg large.jpg)
Is this what the bombs bubble meant?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:52:54 259cc3 No.6980558
>>6980529
You're really nervous there aren't you, you fucking kike.
Guess what?
WE KNOW THEY ARE PURPOSELY RIGGING POLLS
WE EVEN KNOW HOW
YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF FOR SHILLING FOR A BLOODTHIRSTY WAR HAWK LIKE
RODHAM
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:54:04 7351f3 No.6980569
>>6980483
HAPPENING.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:54:20 59e732 No.6980571
>>6980075
im going to bet the nuclear payload of info will be dropped within days of the election, less time for the spin machine to
launder it
for now we'll have to just deal with snippets and hints
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 07:59:43 259cc3 No.6980607
Anyone else think learnincode is ITT rn?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:01:39 ed630e No.6980620
File (hide): 1470063710959.jpg (360.28 KB, 2114x1631, 302:233, 1258389711024.jpg)
So the shills are out in full force.
I wonder if foxnews will break the story after joining in on the anti trump shillathon which has been plaguing the media this
past week.
Also fuck iamkamfy.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:04:49 259cc3 No.6980636>>6980689
Reuters is Back-Rigging Their Polls to Bring Hillary Up
'http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/30/exclusive-pat-caddell-blasts-reuters-back-rigging-polls-toshow-clinton-winning/
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:09:30 70c1b9 No.6980674
>>6979160 (OP)
oh shit it's happening
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:09:33 97cd4a No.6980675
>>6980075
Look at the Battle of Trebia, where Hannibal goaded the Romans. He's waiting until they're fully committed and have no
room to backtrack before he yanks the rug out from under them.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:10:26 0a5f07 No.6980689>>6980692 >>6980709 >>6980745
>>6980636
>Reuters is Back-Rigging Their Polls to Bring Hillary Up
Jesus Christ, that's huge, Routers (tries to be) like a corner stone of real journalism
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:10:45 0a5f07 No.6980692
>>6980689
*Reuters
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:13:24 7902ff No.6980709
>>6980689
I found their polls to be the most accurate during the primaries, so it looks like they'll use that reputation to push
Clintonsurge memes like they did with Rubio.
Problem being, it was pretty transparent when they did it with Rubio, even after going through the trouble of laying the
groundwork to give it some measure of legitimacy. It will not work with Hillary.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:18:15 97cd4a No.6980742>>6980765
File (hide): 1470064695408.jpg (112.78 KB, 900x714, 150:119, Deus kek only the holiest ….jpg)
>>6980485
Risum Vult
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:18:34 ed630e No.6980745
File (hide): 1470064715193.jpg (402.33 KB, 2114x1685, 2114:1685, 1258391051806.jpg)
>>6980689
>tfw /pol/ is the most informative and trusted news site on earth.
Is this real life?
Reminder that iamkamfy is a fucking kike and not to be trusted.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:20:24 629e2a No.6980758
>>6980510
HABBENING IN REAL TIME
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:21:37 a19e7b No.6980765
>>6980742
Cant wait to make a kek army in Kingdom Come: Deliverance.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:29:13 b54f2a No.6980820
File (hide): 1470065354225.png (77.22 KB, 522x658, 261:329, clinton_1.png)
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:29:33 0a0f63 No.6980824>>6980834
>>6980510
At this point I need to consult a physician about the constantly erect state of my jimmy.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:30:47 051a42 No.6980834
>>6980824
I've noticed ever since probably late may I've been waking up with rock solid erections that won't go away until well after I
take a shower.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:31:45 7038df No.6980842
File (hide): 1470065505382.png (406.26 KB, 621x631, 621:631, 1469570329651.png)
>>6980169
HILLARY FOR PRISON
2016 THROUGH FOREVER
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:37:12 a385c2 No.6980877
>>6980169
Fuck a prison cell, there is enough information to put her in the electric chair. If Trump wins and purges the federal
government of cronyism and corruption you can be sure she and people like her will go to death row.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:38:17 52ac35 No.6980881
File (hide): 1470065897547.jpg (45.72 KB, 672x304, 42:19, notany-672x304.jpg)
>Hillary Calls For Giving ALL Illegal Immigrants The “Dry Foot” No-Deportation Deal That Cubans Get
>“This really is a breathtaking step toward open borders,” said Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for
Immigration Studies, which supports lower immigration levels. “If you take that step, it needs to be put in front of the
public: Do you think immigration laws are irrelevant unless the illegal immigrant has committed a violent offense or drug
crime?”
http://www.vdare.com/posts/hillary-calls-for-giving-all-illegal-immigrants-the-dry-foot-no-deportation-deal-that-cubans-get
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:39:45 259cc3 No.6980891>>6980900 >>6980906 >>6980916 >>6980926 >>6981036
File (hide): 1470065985345-0.jpg (47.07 KB, 640x314, 320:157, CouPILCUAAABiF6.jpg large.jpg)
File (hide): 1470065985346-1.jpg (155.93 KB, 1200x1200, 1:1, CoevJaNWIAAw3UD.jpg)
AP WIRE: The Kahn Family Want to Drop the Feud w/ Trump
https://twitter.com/AP/status/760092756668735488
That happened right after Roger Stone called them out for being Muslim Brotherhood operatives. Top fucking kek
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:41:26 a19e7b No.6980900>>6980937 >>6980954
>>6980891
Any legitimate source that they are involved with Muslim Brotherhood?
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:43:07 2e2e3b No.6980906
File (hide): 1470066187744.gif (1.26 MB, 227x136, 227:136, 1457125430395.gif)
>>6980891
Stone does it again.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:44:14 629e2a No.6980913
>Tweet is immediately set upon
>Better than Trump
>lol trumpkins
ffs reeeee GAS CTR
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:44:46 7902ff No.6980916
>>6980891
Wow, another carefully crafted stunt that would have sent virtually every other candidate's campaign into freefall.
It's like she thinks she's up against Jeb or something.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:45:55 89aad2 No.6980920>>6980937
>>6979165
> This is too big to sweep under the rug.
Nope. The media are running with two stories:
> Trump insulted the Muslim "gold star" family.
> Trump doesn't understand Ukraine.
There won't be a mention of this on on MSM.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:46:39 ac1922 No.6980926>>6980937 >>6981036 >>6981152
>>6980891
not only that, but also an immigration lawyer for muslims
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/07/31/media-rush-to-use-khizr-kahn-as-leverage-to-aid-candidate-hillaryclinton/
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:47:58 259cc3 No.6980937>>6980948 >>6980956 >>6981036 >>6981152
>>6980900
>muh legitimate source
How about you try detective work. No one goes crawling back into the shadows or underneath the rock from whence they
came unless they have something to hide. But here you go.
http://shoebat.com/2016/07/31/what-the-media-is-not-telling-you-about-the-muslim-who-attacked-donald-trump-he-is-amuslim-brotherhood-agent-who-wants-to-advance-sharia-law-and-bring-muslims-into-the-united-states/
inb4 "it's a blog". It's all documented. Click the links. See also >>6980926
>>6980920
>(1)
The Khan family is retiring from the public eye. Sorry Mr Brock.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:48:43 5ed321 No.6980942
>>6979196
SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:51:11 7902ff No.6980948>>6980957
>>6980937
His body language alone was a huge tell, very scripted and unnatural, then he starts doing televised interviews where he
spouts inflammatory nonsense for the sole purpose of baiting Trump which made it far too obvious.
I really hope this doesn't just fade and the people who push this to the point of emotional breakdowns (Megyn Kelly) need
to be aggressively shamed for it.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:53:57 95d7dd No.6980954>>6981119 >>6981152
>>6980900
https://twitter.com/RogerJStoneJr/status/759941783098761216?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
straight from his mouth
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:53:57 89aad2 No.6980956
>>6980937
I told you want the MEDIA is running, idiot.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:54:02 259cc3 No.6980957
>>6980948
>His body language alone was a huge tell, very scripted and unnatural
Anon, if you want an image of the future under Hillary, imagine a Muslim lawyer with a dead zogbot suicide bomber son
waving a Constitution in your face - for ever
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:54:28 775067 No.6980960
File (hide): 1470066868486.png (80.78 KB, 700x700, 1:1, anons OC smug edition.png)
>>6980169
Thank you for your contribution, but
NEEDS MORE SMUG
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 08:55:17 87c4a2 No.6980965>>6981015
File (hide): 1470066917239.jpg (34.5 KB, 600x556, 150:139, 02d.jpg)
DUBS FOR THE DUBS GOD.
CLINTON'S PRISON SENTENCE WILL BE SOON, AND IT WILL NOT BE SHORT
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:01:35 95d7dd No.6981015
>>6980965
>Off by one.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:05:02 55778d No.6981036>>6981048
File (hide): 1470067503063.jpg (42.11 KB, 340x300, 17:15, 247.jpg)
>>6980891
>>6980926
>>6980937
Motherfucking 4-D chess.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:06:45 ac1922 No.6981048
>>6981036
you can bet your ass Trump did a little research on the guy before laying into him like he did
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:11:55 7902ff No.6981075
File (hide): 1470067915693.png (416.96 KB, 625x618, 625:618, wl.png)
moar
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/760145201008668672?lang=en
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:13:19 ac1922 No.6981087>>6981152
BTFO
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/khan-specializes-in-visa-programs-accused-of-selling-u.s.citizenship/article/2598279?custom_click=rss
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:15:11 5f654f No.6981100>>6981114 >>6981118 >>6981134 >>6981140
File (hide): 1470068111795.png (182.19 KB, 537x515, 537:515, 1467337171922-2.png)
>tfw Hillary is probably going to win anyway
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:17:47 259cc3 No.6981114>>6981129
File (hide): 1470068268013.jpg (232.06 KB, 1160x629, 1160:629, trump vince.jpg)
>>6981100
The fact that you shill for a woman who's policies & actions in office would financially destroy you is almost pathetic. I
hope you go through a tragedy soon that you never recover from.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:18:06 739316 No.6981118
File (hide): 1470068286118.png (2.46 MB, 1920x1080, 16:9, 1469877914798.png)
>>6981100
What a fucking cuck. You aren't gonna argue your way out of a NK gulag sentence, you have to pray that the US applies
enough pressure to get it undone.
I would have been like "I'll trade you 4 packs of american cigarettes and an ipad if you let me go"
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:18:08 0a0f63 No.6981119
>>6980954
>click on first shill reply
>baleet ur account!
>roger stone: no asswipe baleet yours XDDD
This year is so much fun
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:18:46 5ed321 No.6981123>>6981143
File (hide): 1470068326190.png (278.41 KB, 600x400, 3:2, JULIAN ASSANGE PRAISE KEK.png)
>>6979666
>>6979688
PRAISE KEK
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:19:42 5f654f No.6981129
>>6981114
>The fact that you shill for a woman
I don't want her to win.
My mother smacked me on the back of my head when I said I was rooting for Trump.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:19:56 ab1805 No.6981130>>6981143
Stickied
hmm ok, let's check
>youtube video 2013
>copypaste of thegatewaypundit.com
Stickied ?
>in the archive of thegatewaypundit.com
democracynow.org/2016/7/25/assange_why_i_created_wikileaks_searchable
>Interview of Assange about the email dumps he released in March
Yep, nothing new. Why is it stickied ??
Now, for those of you like (((259cc3)))
Reminder that :
>those emails were leaked in MarchYET hillary's still a presidential candidate.
>Hillary & Benghazi is pretty well known YET no prosecution against her.
>Clinton Foundation rigged the medias & the DNC YET hillary's still candidate.
>The FBI Director seats in front of hundreds of millions telling she should be imprisonned YET she's still here.
I'm all for a fucking life sentence of multiracial gangbanging in guantanamo for Pillory, but either she's been kept alive for
the election sake, or they have so much power that they'll try to rigg the election.
It's like back in 2001, the WTC the Pentagon and thousands of people died, but no trial for Bush and his administration.
THIS IS NOT A DEMORALIZATION POST
THIS IS JUST THE REALITY
Shills will reply to this post without any counter-arguments to what I just told
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:20:40 ebf3ab No.6981134
File (hide): 1470068440027.png (69.55 KB, 231x181, 231:181, 1423512749622.png)
>>6981100
that guy should get beat to death.
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:21:36 2e2e3b No.6981140
File (hide): 1470068496962.gif (5.22 MB, 320x240, 4:3, 1419819883911.gif)
>>6981100
>>tfw Hillary is probably going to win anyway
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:22:05 259cc3 No.6981143
>>6981123
Goddamn it I'm gonna need an Assange folder for this election, aren't I?
>>6981130
"Hello, fellow Trump supporters, I have bad news, but I'm totally one of you, now…"
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:23:02 c80dba No.6981152
>>6980926
>>6980937
>>6980954
>>6981087
^
This
I can tell you also that the media in my country are very heavily shilling against Trump for over 2 weeks now. Last one is
this Khan thing, 4 articles now.
And worst of all, they are using heavy filter shit on the comment section. And now I think that the archive.is link are also
put to the "inappropriate phrase" filter
▶
Anonymous 08/01/16 (Mon) 09:26:18 775067 No.6981167
>>6981152
>heavily shilling against Trump for over 2 weeks now
Only two weeks? We've only had the mainstream narrative since the very beginning of Trump. Non-US countries get US
news either from the mass-medias tits or not at all.
http://8ch.net/pol/res/6979160.html#6980483