Illinois Ballot Integrity: Manipulation of Hand-Count "Audit" of Ballots to Fit Official Results.

[reformist2]

In a nutshell: Auditors would hand count the paper printout of the machines, then would look at the numbers they "should" have gotten, i.e., the numbers reported on election night, and then they would change their hand counts to match the official numbers... some audit!!

From the Chicago Board of Elections meeting, April 5, 2016

(Starting at about 29:00)

DR. LORA CHAMBERLAIN, ILLINOIS BALLOT INTEGRITY: We highly object to an audit where the answers to the tests are sitting right there in front of the Board of Elections employees that are trying to count these ballots. So what we saw, and many of us saw, you'll hear time and time again, that what happened in reality, especially with the touch-screen machines, especially with the early-voting machines, because there's lots of votes... is that the auditors, the people that are doing the hand tallies of the votes, would miss votes, correct their tallies, erase their tallies, to fit the prescribed recommended official results, that the board of Elections has right on their tally sheets, there's a lot of pressure, including their employment, that is pushing them toward complying with the Board of Elections results, and not just actually just reading the votes and tallying the votes. It's supposed to be a hand count of the votes, but that's not what happened.... in your packet you have a bunch of affidavits... in one particular egregious example of this, I was watching the hand count of an early voting machine, and at the end of it, they had to erase 21 Bernie Sanders votes, and add 49 Hillary Clinton votes, to fit, to force the hand count of the audit of this toilet paper roll to the recommended Chicago Board of Elections official results. And we object to that kind of audit, it's not an audit, we would like an independent audit going forward, with some quality assurance to it.

...

(Starting at about 36:30)

COMMISSIONER WILLIAM J. KRESSE: May I ask a question...Does any of these point to any of the election races, would they have changed the results of the race?

DR. LORA CHAMBERLAIN: "Absolutely. In the one race that I quoted you the touch-screen machine it was a large touch-screen machine ... had a lot of votes on it. 70 votes where they had to... So the hand tally showed that Bernie Sanders had gotten 223 votes, and that Hillary Clinton had gotten 46 less votes. The hand tally showed that. But to meet the official recommended results, they had to literally erase Bernie Sanders votes and add Hillary Clinton's...that's approximately 70 votes. 70 times about 500 active machines in the field, and there's more that we have documented here, is a lot of votes.

[djean111]

1. She will never be the legitimate winner.

Never. Always a cloud, always a stain, always cheating.

[Punkingal]

2. That is outrageous....they ERASED votes?

[HooptieWagon]

4. Not only erased Sanders votes...

...but added them to Clinton totals until they got the results they desired. Election Fraud.

[Punkingal]

5. I knew Bernie won Illinois. This proves it!

[reformist2]

12. It's the "overcounts" that prove the fraud. When counting up a list, its easy to undercount but not

as easy to overcount.

In most cases, you undercount, and the totals you get will be below the actual numbers for both candidates. Even if you somehow overcount, the numbers for both candidates should be higher, but that's very rare.

But when your results show one person got more than the official results, and the other person got less, that's not an auditor mistake, that shows a real error in the official results.

[NWCorona]

3. IMHO this is just the tip of the iceberg

Thanks for the post!

[reformist2]

6. You're welcome. It took me an hour to transcribe Dr. Chamberlain's statements.

Sometimes it's easier to read someone's statements than it is to listen to them. Also, the importance of what someone is saying is sometimes clearer when seen in plain-old black and white.

[NWCorona]

9. This is huge and the fact that it's crickets from the naysayers is telling.

I think Bernie needs to push for more audits.

[reformist2]

20. I agree. I would like Bernie to set aside a percentage of his campaign donations to this cause.

[NWCorona]

22. I'm familiar with sample audits and if this was uncovered with a sample of just 5%

Imagine what the rest looks like.

I think if he doesn't someone will dig more into it.

[reformist2]

23. I'd like to see the officially filed report on this 5% Audit. Does it say everything was hunky-dory?

[Jitter65]

7. Take a breath! It's like totaling a number on a calculator and then adding by hand. The hand count

doesn't match the calculator so you run the calculator totals a gain and they match so the hand count must be off. If you make three hand counts and they come out different each time you know the manual count has some errors so you check the manual count. If it comes out to match the machine count (calculator count) then you change the hand counts to match what you know is probably the correct numbers. It seems to me that the hand counters were making errors in Bernie's favor and not the other way around.

[JunkYardDogg]

8. Good article

Nice work
This just adds to the list of things to watch for

[nashville_brook]

10. wow. brazen.

what are we? Sierra Leone, here?

[reformist2]

15. Yes. With more "high-tech" voting machines.

[dana_b]

11. Also: Chicago Audit: Efforts to Thwart Auditors of Democratic Primary Election – Vote Switching from

Chicago Audit: Efforts to Thwart Auditors of Democratic Primary Election – Vote Switching from Clinton To Sanders Discovered
Posted on April 21, 2016 by truthfirst12013
Those charged with conducting a 5% audit in Chicago found their efforts actively thwarted and noted that effort to MATCH the tallies to the official results. This is BLATANT manipulation of the vote. Additionally, the ballots they did examine flipped results from Sanders to (in favor of) Hillary Clinton. This is the full hearing in Chicago, please start around 21 minutes to hear the testimony from the auditors. Outrageous and further documentation of the OBVIOUS. The votes are being flipped on the machines. Sanders needs to ACT now in New York: (click on the photo to see video)
https://electionfraud2016.wordpress.com/

I don't trust the results at all in the primaries. It's more difficult to cheat in a caucus.

[Dem2]

13. Just to add my comment from the other thread

For those interested, start viewing at about 24:30. I agree with the author of the DKos article, "There’s no way to know how egregious the errors in the machine count and their purported audit were without further investigation and research." I can't comment further, there's not enough evidence to suggest much of anything other than someone should have filed for a recount since it was stated that the 5% audit is not in itself to be used to change any results.


The audit checked out according to the officials, if it is felt that they did something wrong at the 5% audit, they should file a lawsuit.

[reformist2]

14. If the auditors changed their numbers to match the official numbers, that's enough for a lawsuit.

An accurate count of the paper printouts is paramount. In the end, it's that count that matters, not the one reported on election night.

[Dem2]

17. I agree

They ought to for a law suit if they are fairly certain the numbers didn't match.

[AzDar]

16. K & R

[DebDoo]

18. K&R

[KoKo]

19. Recommend...

[brooklynite]

21. Can you point us to the Sanders Campaign's formal complaint about the outcome?