Election lawsuit happening now- Exit poll results

[Gregorian]

Go to 1:46:16 since du doesn't imbed properly.

They have the evidence now. Exact precincts, and all. So we might be able to address the crimes. Yes, crimes. They're filing it as racketeering.

&feature=youtu.be&t=1h46m16s

[tonyt53]

1. This crap has grown very, very old.

[Gregorian]

2. Sorry.

[nilram]

100. Exactly. And that's why lawsuits are necessary. Thanks.

[Gothmog]

3. Do Sanders supporters get tire of losing these bogus lawsuits?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. " My lawyer friend tells me frivolous complaints are a form of fraud."

[Gothmog]

22. The recent California lawsuit was a joke and this lawsuit sounds equally bogus

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. Vexatious litigation.

[bkkyosemite]

4. Start listening a 1:43:19

"stop suppressing the evidence of crime" absolutely. Exit polls are way off not normal. Patches illegally put on machines way over the allowed small percentage...rigged.

[leftynyc]

5. You mean exit polls

that are non-scientific where people are free to lie? Those exit polls?

[GreatGazoo]

15. so your theory is that people who voted for Hillary lied to exit poll takers

interesting.

Meanwhile the GOP polls were within MOE.

[leftynyc]

17. I have no idea

as I've never put one second thought into them. Just like I don't give a second thought to internet polls - if polls are unscientific, they're worthless. Period.

[moriah]

45. No, my theory is exit polls aren't accurately accounting for early voter demographics.

I had posted after Arkansas had their primary data up (it's not there now, which makes me frustrated because I like to provide evidence for what I say) that, despite being considered an outlier where Sanders did more poorly than expected by exit polls alone, that at least at my precinct the older Scantron technology was in place and we had many more early votes than before.

http://www.bustle.com/articles/145057-these-super-tuesday-early-voting-numbers-make-one-thing-clear

The results that were on the SoS's office indicated Hillary and Cruz, the more "conservative" picks and the ones who took the state, had higher numbers in early voting compared to election day.

If they're not properly calibrating the exit poll data on either amount of early voting or demographics of early voters, that would explain things much more simply than the massive intentional corruption that would have to be inherent in such widespread fraud as is otherwise claimed.

[AgingAmerican]

113. Individual polling stations report their own numbers

Which can be matched to exit polls done at same stations...

[moriah]

114. No pollsters outside of my station on election day -- had to bust my rump to get there before ....

Polls closed. Any random sample has a margin of error.

Early and mail vote (like Oregon) is beginning to make standard exit polls unreliable. Even if they try to account for previous election early voters, the percentage is increasing with each election. In countries where everyone votes the same day, where every precinct has an exit pollster, they may be more reliable. Not when 30+% of the electorate isn't even available to be polled.

[SheenaR]

115. Repubs were within throughout the season

While ours were frequently off. But if you make note of that, you are a conspiracy theorist to some.

I think we are trying to protect our elections, ranked worst in the Western world
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/29/u-s-elections-ranked-worst-among-western-democracies-heres-why/

[Renew Deal]

47. And don't count absentee and mail in votes?

[leftynyc]

56. There are many reasons

exit polls are not considered valid. This ridiculous lawsuit is going to get thrown out immediately.

[xynthee]

6. I don't suppose you could give us a few details about the racketeering, could you?

Thank you!

[Tarc]

7. Yes, I am terribly convinced by a video of a video on a whitescreen

Pictures taped to a board, with arrows, in front of a crowd of maybe, 10? 15?

For 2 and a half hours to boot.

I bet there's instant coffee and pastries on a foldout table on the side, too.

Video by Ed Ellsworth, Enlightened Films
Category Entertainment
License Standard YouTube License

Indeed.

[firebrand80]

9. Cool, another lawsuit nt

[stevenleser]

11. And when reputable lawyers get tired of being laughed out of court, there's Orly Taitz

I hear she is looking for a new project to burnish her "legal eagle" reputation

[bkkyosemite]

12. "All the hiding is over..it's all coming out" Latino's and AA votes were stolen according to

the lawyer talking.

[JudyM]

14. Oh. My. God. This is stunning!!! A lawsuit and citizen-based exit poll in CA. Cliff said this was

going to be widely communicated before the CA primary... that unfortunately hasn't happened.

This is the first I'm seeing this...

DONATE TO THE CALIF. EXIT POLLING HERE:
http://trustvote.org/donate/

Thanks for posting this!!

[Retrograde]

16. Can you provide a precise

For those of us who don't have 2+ hours to spend on vague conspiracy theories? Who's suing whom? Over what? What do the plaintiffs want the defendants to do?

(Is this about exit polls in California, the state that strongly encourages voting by mail? If someone does decide to poll voters at polling places tomorrow I suspect they'll be heavily slanted towards Sanders: Clinton voters have probably mostly done so already.)

[KULawHawk]

35. Fair points, except..

Edison, and the other exit polling firms have built into their models to account for absentee balloting. This isn't some new group they forgot about taking into account for, and all of a sudden people are pointing out to them.

Professional statisticians didn’t absentmindedly overlook an entire segment of voters that even random posters on the Internet thought to account for.

The line is used in the media as an excuse for why projections and exiting polling are not matching up.

[MinnesotaRob]

37. I've only listened to ~15 minutes so far starting from 1:46:00...

Maybe the biggest revelation is that the reason for the mysteriously canceled exit polls is that a lawsuit was filed to force the media to release unadjusted exit polls to the public, and rather than do that they decided not to conduct exit polls at all.

The media is being sued for being complicit in a crime by covering up evidence of criminal activity after the fact. Also he said that Hillary is not complicit, she is being used.

[Gothmog]

61. Exit polls have a very high margin of error and are expensive

The nomination is not in doubt and so the media companies are not willing to pay for exit polls.

[Peace Patriot]

101. Funny, Germany considers exit polls the gold standard for detecting election fraud...

...as does most of the world. Funny, how everybody is competent at this election integrity method except us.

The ignorance of the American public on election integrity issues is phenomenal, and the ignorance among people who call themselves Democrats is scandalous.

[Enthusiast]

105. The ignorance of the American public on election integrity has been carefully cultivated.

Think back to the media reactions to claims of election fraud in 2000 and 2004. A serious discussion never took place. They had their desired results and they didn't want anything to interfere with that.

[Dont call me Shirley]

109. More Election Austerity...

[Voice for Peace]

84. supposedly being filed today.. think they'll report it?

[hopemountain]

98. not conspiracy. repeat. not a conspiracy.

and not vague, in the least.

[tritsofme]

18. Wrong forum, please repost.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1135

[Live and Learn]

19. It is rather obvious that many here don't care how they win as long as they win. nt

[Adrahil]

20. Why bother with actual voting? Just use exit polls!

Oh yeah, let's just forget the fact that even the exit pollsters say these particular polls are not constructed to predict or verify the end result.

[Lord Magus]

21. Are you kidding me, a "citizen exit poll"?

And of course, there's no possibility that this would have a predetermined outcome to match their predetermined lawsuit. Not at all.

[Gothmog]

23. The whole press conference is equally insande

[Duckfan]

96. Actually it's more informitative than anything else.

Watch and please take notes.

[Renew Deal]

27. People will say anything to get some of these citizen exit poll wackos out of their face

So if the person can figure out what the answer should be they will give it to them to get away.

[onenote]

24. Is there a copy of this lawsuit anywhere? And who exactly are they suing?

The "MSM"? I don't think the "mainstream media" is an entity one can sue. And suing individual newspaper or cable or broadcast news outlets seems more than just a bit heavy handed given this thing called the First Amendment.

[Gregorian]

25. They're suing the media for being complicit in the election fraud crimes.

Thus, the racketeering charges. They sound like they have their legal bases covered. I sure hope so.

[onenote]

26. "The media" isn't an entity that can be sued. So which specific media outlets are being sued.

And given that no one appears to have seen this lawsuit or can even say who it specifically is against, it's rather strange to say it sounds like they have their legal bases covered.

And this sounds like a civil RICO claim, not a criminal one, despite your reference to crimes.

[randome]

39. Sue 'em all and let God sort it out!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Cali_Democrat]

79. LOL

[nc4bo]

48. 4 major networks, Associated Press and CNN. nt

[onenote]

49. And what are they alleged to have done that isn't protected by the First Amendment?

[nc4bo]

51. Can't remember the exact wording so forgive me.

That these media outlets aided in the fraud by not reporting exit poll numbers.....I think that's how it was worded.

[onenote]

76. So by deciding not to spend money conducting exit polls late in the campaign

they committed a RICO violation.

That's so funny it makes my stomach hurt. There is no way any organization, let alone a media organization, can be forced to conduct exit polls. And there is nothing that stops groups from conducting their own exit polling if they think its necessary or useful in trying to establish election fraud.

I didn't think it would be possible for a lawsuit to get tossed faster than the suit brought in California, but it may turn out that I'm wrong.

[nc4bo]

78. I have some Pepto for that bellyache.

I have no idea what to expect to come out of this so I will just sit here doing this and until further notice.

[Blue Meany]

104. No, by not releasing the actual results of their exit poll but

rather changing them over the course of the night and forcing them to conform to the official vote tallies by the end of the counting--that is what they are alleging is collusion. This is not done in other countries, so exit polls become a flag for potential fraud when they significantly different from the vote count. That has happened consistently in presidential elections in the US since 2000, including in this primary. But the potential fraud was not investigated because the data was not publicly available.

[Lord Magus]

28. They very clearly don't have ANY bases covered.

Their whole "lawsuit" is a complete farce.

[GulfCoast66]

32. But it's CRIME!!

CRIME I tell you!!

🙀🙀

[Gothmog]

63. Your faith in these idiots is so cute and adorable

The California lawsuit was laughed at by the federal judge and this case will suffer a similar fate

[jamese777]

30. Exit Polls are Conducted by...

the National Election Pool (NEP), consisting of ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, FOX News, and NBC. They conduct joint election exit polls. Since 2004 these exit polls have been conducted for the NEP by Edison Media Research.
So the lawsuit would have to be filed against Edison Media Research and those specific media outlets.

[onenote]

42. Justice Souter on RICO and the First Amendment

"even in a case where a RICO violation has been validly established, the First Amendment may limit the relief that can be granted against an organization otherwise engaging in protected expression"

Suing media outlets is going to be pretty tough.

And I'd still like to know exactly what activity they are alleged to have engaged in that gives rise to a RICO claim.

[MineralMan]

31. Frivolous Lawsuits Are a Shame on Bernie's Supporters.

They should be summarily dismissed and the plaintiff's roundly scolded by the courts.

[floriduck]

58. I'm a supporter and knew none of this. I feel zero shame.

[Dont call me Shirley]

110. The Shame lies with the cheater, vote suppressor and election fraudster. Of which Bernie is innocent

[geek tragedy]

33. Maybe they can hire Orly Taitz as their lawyer, nt

[Fast Walker 52]

34. perhaps you could write out the specific charges from the video?

It would be useful, rather than having to watch the thing

[KULawHawk]

36. Another example :

You want to discuss fraud?

Too bad the Denver Post already exposed the DNC and Clinton campaign attempting to defraud the Colorado results. 10 precincts of at least 4% of Sanders' votes.
Just enough to give her control of the state delegation when superdelegates would give her more overall delegates than him even though he won Colorado by 68%.

While the Democratic Party knew about the discrepancy a week after the caucus, it chose not to correct the public record, according to the “Denver Post.” For some reason, the Hillary Clinton campaign knew about the problem, but the Sanders campaign was not informed until late Monday by the “Denver Post.”

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/06/03/breaking-major-vote-counting-error-in-democratic-primary-discovered-sanders-picks-up-delegates-video/

[KULawHawk]

38. There's also articles covering it at...

Huffington Post, numerous Arizona papers, and tons of online media outlets.


Arizona Secretary of State Confirms Election Fraud During Primary Vote

APRIL 1, 2016

http://m.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/arizona_secretary_of_state_confirms_fraud_during_primary_vote_20160401

The voter controversy in Arizona is intensifying.



During a committee hearing at the state Capitol in Phoenix this week, Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan admitted that wrongdoing occurred in the Arizona primary for the presidential election on March 22, U.S. Uncut reports. Asked to explain the multiple incidents of “anecdotal evidence” of voter suppression, Reagan stated that her office has been “working extensively” on the problem and said that even one of her own employees had experienced a problem.

The acknowledgment comes a week after angry Arizona residents demanded a revote for the primary, accusing the state of voter suppression and describing several forms of disenfranchisement, including some voters’ party affiliations having been changed unbeknownst to them.

Reagan’s testimony did not pacify voters. As she nervously addressed a distraught audience about election fraud, she said that her office “knows it happened”—earning her a shower of boos and other upset exclamations. She added that her team cross-checked “voter registration forms to see and try to pinpoint which are the files that we believe were possibly affected” but that “a complete report” was nowhere near completion. Perhaps even worse, Reagan noted that her office has heard reports of the same type of fraud in previous elections, but never “to this level.”

Although an explanation for the registration changes remains a mystery, the hacker group Anonymous has suggested that Arizona’s online database was hacked. The group cited multiple anecdotes and discussions with “veteran hackers,” one of whom scanned the state’s site and “discovered a massive vulnerability in less than a minute” that “is nearly impossible to defend against a skilled and determined attacker.”

All of this information is unsettling, as U.S. Uncut writes:

Because Arizona is a closed primary state, those who aren’t previously registered as Democrat, Republican, or Green are prohibited from voting in primary elections. In its investigation of voter suppression claims in Arizona, Anonymous made the case that because Arizona stores voter registration information in easily-hackable SQL databases, it would be easy for any hacker to gain access to databases and change voter registration from one of the approved parties to independent. This would render thousands of votes impotent in the primary and drastically change the outcome.

Truthdig also has heard reports that similar party affiliation changes are occurring in New York. If this has happened to you in any state, please let us know in our Facebook comments section or send us a direct message.


http://m.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/arizona_secretary_of_state_confirms_fraud_during_primary_vote_20160401

[LanternWaste]

40. his unsupported allegation are the only way to reach his conclusion...

He certainly makes many unsupported allegations to reach his final conclusion. No doubt, his unsupported allegation are the only way to reach his conclusion...

[PepperHarlan]

41. Oh boy

[KULawHawk]

43. Systemic and wide...

It's the worst kept secret that the entire thing has been rigged to crown her and nobody would say otherwise with a straight face.


The Primaries: Hillary wins the lottery


Bernie Sanders’ exit poll share has exceeded his recorded vote share by greater than the margin of error in 11 of 26 primaries: AL AZ GA MA NY OH MS SC TX WI WV. The probability P that at least 11 exit polls would exceed the MoE is calculated using the Binomial distribution.

P = 1 in 76.8 BILLION = 1-BINOMDIST(10,26,0.025,true)

The Margin of Error (MoE) is based on the number of respondents and the vote shares:
MoE =1.3*1.96*sqrt (EP*(1-EP)/N), where EP is the 2-party exit poll share, N is the number of respondents, 1.3 is the exit poll cluster factor adjustment. There is a 95% probability that the exit poll will fall within the MoE.

The probability of fraud is calculated using the Normal distribution. The probability is based on the difference (DIFF) between the exit poll share (EP) and recorded share (RS) less the MoE. If DIFF=MoE, the probability is 97.5%.

P = normdist (EP, RS, MoE/1.96,true)


Probability of voter fraud :

99.999999999999%

Chances that his vote totals would be so much less than the exiting polling in 11 states:

1 in 76,829,636,415


https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com

About the Author:

Richard Charnin is a graduate from Queens College (NY) in 1965 with a BA in Mathematics. After college, Richard accepted a job as a numerical control engineer/programmer for Grumman Aerospace Corporation, a major defense/aerospace manufacture, including development on the lunar module.

Charnin later obtained an MS in Applied Mathematics (Adelphi University, 1969) and a PhD in Operations Research (Polytechnic Institute of NY, 1973).

In 1976, Richard was hired by a Wall Street firm as Managing Developer of Corporate Finance Quantitative Applications for White Weld & Co, an old-line investment bank that was acquired by Merrill Lynch in 1978.

With the arrival of personal computers in 1982, he was tasked with the conversion and updating of the mainframe FORTRAN application programs to interface, including Lotus 1-2-3 spreadsheets - and years later for Excel.

After starting his own business as an independent software consultant, Charnin specialized in the creation and advanced tools for quantitative applications development for major domestic and foreign financial institutions, investment firms and industrial corporations.

Published works include:

Proving Election Fraud: Phantom Voters, Uncounted Votes, and the National Exit Poll

Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-Election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts

Reclaiming Science: the JFK Conspiracy: A mathematical analysis

[Betty Karlson]

46. But math only applies when it is in favor of Clinton.

Don't you know that by now?

[onenote]

50. So if the claim is that the exit poll data overstated the actual results

What exactly is the claim against the media organizations that did the exit polling?

[KULawHawk]

60. Media doesn't do exiting polling.

Independent firms, like Edison, paid for by the parties do them. They pay for secondary access from how Chuck Todd explained it.

By the way, after news of people looking at the discrepancies, the DNC decided to stop having Exit Polling conducted. There were no Exit Polls in Kentucky or Oregon, and they are cancelling Exit Polling in California, New Jersey and the rest of the remaining states. Why?

F.A.I.R. is independently paying for exit polling to be done this Tuesday in at least California. They were able to raise enough money to hire a firm to properly cover CA given it's size and population, but I'm not sure if they were able to afford it for every state holding contests tomorrow.
(Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting - a media and government watchdog)

You've got a better chance at turning $1000 into more than a $1,000,000 in a year legitimately than so many states with major discrepancies.

[onenote]

74. I'm still searching for an explanation of what the lawsuit is alleging as a violation

committed by either the media organizations that hired Edison or by Edison.

From what I've seen posted here, it is claimed that the exit polls showed higher numbers for Sanders than the official results. But how does that translate into a violation by the groups doing or sponsoring the exit polls. Obviously, the claim isn't that the conspired to overstate the exit poll results. Indeed, it seems that the claimants are claiming the exit polls are accurate. So why are they being sued and for what?

[KULawHawk]

80. To look at the

Unadjusted polling data. Raw numbers, I believe that they use in then plug in to their formula for coming up with their exit poll numbers.

[onenote]

81. So are they trying to prove the reported exit polls are too high or too low?

Are they claiming the published exit polls aren't supported by the underlying data collected by the pollsters? To what end? And in pursuit of what criminal enterprise?

[KULawHawk]

83. The exit polls indicate

Voting machine tampering or adjusted tabulation numbers being reported. It's real. See Colorado and the Denver Post caught the DNC and Clinton camp knowing that reported numbers were false and never correcting it publicly or informing Sanders campaign.


Too bad the Denver Post already exposed the DNC and Clinton campaign attempting to defend the Colorado results. 10 precincts of at least 4% of Sanders' votes.
Just enough to give her control of the state delegation when superdelegates would give her more overall delegates than him even though he won Colorado by 68%.

To quote:

While the Democratic Party knew about the discrepancy a week after the caucus, it chose not to correct the public record, according to the “Denver Post.” For some reason, the Hillary Clinton campaign knew about the problem, but the Sanders campaign was not informed until late Monday by the “Denver Post.”

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/06/03/breaking-major-vote-counting-error-in-democratic-primary-discovered-sanders-picks-up-delegates-video/

[onenote]

85. So how does that make the exit poll takers guilty of anything?

If the claim is that their numbers are correct and the official numbers are tampered with, what is the basis for naming the exit poll takers defendants?

[KULawHawk]

86. I already said.

Access to the raw data.

[onenote]

87. In what legal universe can you name someone as a defendant simply to get access to their information

Long before there is any discovery of their information, the case would be dismissed against them for failure to state a claim.

You have Law in your username so I would think you'd understand that.

[KULawHawk]

90. Show me the complaint.

It will state the claims for which relief is being sought.

Otherwise, I don’t think you're following the issue and if they are filing a motion to compel.

[onenote]

91. That's my point - without a copy of the complaint its hard to assess whether this suit makes sense

On the surface, however, I can't figure out how it would. Or why the raw data would be relevant. But if and when there is a complaint (and I have my doubts about that), we'll all be in a better position to assess the strategy.

[KULawHawk]

92. Until filed then naturally everything has yet

to be fleshed out. More than enough evidence that raise valid questions. Any free and open society should welcome transparency.


Posted on another forum:

Since you show so little interest in statistical analysis, let me briefly go over what you should know:

First of all, exit polls are the accepted international standard for indications of election fraud and vote tampering. Here I refer you to Eric Bjornlund and Glenn Cowan’s 2011 pamphlet, Vote Count Verification: a User’s Guide for Funders, Implementers and Stakeholders. Their work, done under the auspices of Democracy International for the US Agency for International Development (USAID), outlines how exit polling is used to ensure free and fair elections.

“U.S.-funded organizations have sponsored exit polls as part of democracy assistance programs in Macedonia (2005), Afghanistan (2004), Ukraine (2004), Azerbaijan (2005), the West Bank and Gaza Strip (2005), Lebanon (2005), Kazakhstan (2005), Kenya (2005, 2007), and Bangladesh (2009), among other places,” the pamphlet states.

When election results do not match exit poll results, we should not simply accept these results. What Charnin does, which he has been doing for many years, is study improbable election results that fall statistically outside the “margin of error” (MoE).

For example, Ohio primary exit polls indicated that Clinton would win 51.4% to Sanders’ 47.6%. She was expected to win by 3.8%. The actual vote indicated she won 56.5% to 43%. Clinton won the election by 13.8% which was 10 percentage points more than the exit polls indicated.

Statistics tell us that the correct Ohio MoE was 3.12% based on N=1670 respondents. There is a 0.1% probability that the 5.1% exit poll discrepancy from the recorded vote was due to chance. Therefore there is a 99.9% probability that the official Ohio primary results were improbable.

These results should trigger further investigative analysis.

Take a look at Charnin’s statistics in this post for Democratic primary MoE and probability calculations.

Please tell me, Mr. Holland, where Charnin’s wrong – and show your math.

If these results happened in the Ukraine in 2004, the U.S. State Department would be denouncing the election as fraudulent and demanding an investigation or a revote. By the way, this did happen in 2004. You may recall the Orange Revolution when Ukrainian people took to the streets to protest the fraudulent election. Unlike Mr. Holland and some of his peers, Ukrainians care about stolen elections.

Why is this important? Obviously, if you don’t understand or accept exit polling and can’t analyze poll results versus election results, you won’t recognize election tampering. And that’s what those who would tamper with elections are counting on.

What you have failed to do is study and attend classes where we went over the basic acronym HISMISTER, which provides basic guidelines to determine if a poll is valid.

H = Historical intervention. Did an unexpected historical event affect the results? In an exit poll, voters are asked how they voted as they leave the polls. There is generally no time for a historical intervention to happen between casting a vote and telling the pollsters outside the polling site how you voted.

I = Instrumentation. Were the correct instruments used? If the pollsters asked who people voted for in the presidential race, we assume they were using the correct survey instrument. However, if the voting machines did not record the correct votes, that could cause a discrepancy in the corresponding election results. See “R” below.

S = Sample. Was the sample of voters polled randomized and representative of the demographics of the state? The problem with your work is that you never offer any example for why the exit polls are wrong. You have never taken issue with the pollster’s sample.

Also, while you denounce Charnin’s analysis, you never point out how or why his math is wrong based on standard statistical probability.

M = Measurement. Were the same identifiers studied in the comparison? In this case, the pollsters asked voters who they voted for in the presidential race and those numbers were compared to presidential election results. This would not appear to be a problem.

I = Implementation. Were the procedures used to collect, organize and analyze the data done correctly? If the exit pollsters went to the right precincts and used the correct sample based on the right demographics, we assume the implementation was correct.

S = Survey. Did the survey, or poll, reflect the correct methodology? There has been no challenge to the exit pollsters’ methodology.

T = Technique. Was the poll conducted in an unbiased professional manner? Generally polls are conducted by well-paid professional pollsters.

E = Errors. Are there unexplained unintentional human errors? For example, a poll worker or election official incorrectly enters voting data.

R = Recording. If applicable, did the instruments record the information correctly? When voting machines and central tabulators record different information than what voters are telling exit pollsters, then we must check to make sure our instruments recorded the vote correctly. And we must check to make sure that no one tampered with or rigged the recorded numbers.

On this section, I must give you a zero. There is a more likely than not probability that either faulty instrumentation or election tampering played a role in the improbable official election results. The United States fails basic standards of transparency because there’s no way to verify the actual vote total. Your blind faith in nontransparent voting equipment that is manufactured and programmed by private, partisan, for-profit corporations using secret proprietary software is inexcusable.

Here’s the correct answer: “We can’t verify the vote because seven states – Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia use Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting machines, i.e., computer voting without paper trails. In 18 other states, DREs are used with paper trails – generally a small piece of paper not designed to be recounted. In virtually all other states, private tabulators secretly record the vote.

I was an international election observer for El Salvador’s 1994 presidential election. Had the ARENA Party said that the votes would be counted on machines built by their friends in private industry and tabulated on computers belonging to major donors of their party, my report would have been simple to write: The election is assumed to be fraudulent due to non-transparency and lack of auditing accountability.

Corporate for-profit media – CNN, The New York Times, Washington Post, ABC, etc. – claim that the official vote count must always be right. As a journalist you should be skeptical of these claims. What these media gatekeepers are telling us are that the universal laws of statistics apply everywhere in the world except in the United States. They would have us believe that when Clinton repeatedly beat Sanders by implausible numbers we are expected to lack an understanding of basic statistics and accept the improbable. They tell us not to pay attention to the technicians behind the curtain secretly programming the DREs and central vote tabulators.

With a legal suit looming that demanded both adjusted and unadjusted exit polls be made public after the California primary, we just learned that Edison Research has canceled exit polls for all the remaining primaries. Edison has a monopoly on all exit polling for the mainstream media consortium.

We have now lost what Bjornlund and Cowan call “… an effective method for projecting election results.”



Professor Bob Fitrakis is co-author, with Harvey Wasserman, of the newly-published Strip & Flip Selection of 2016: Five Jim Crows & Electronic Election Theft. Fitrakis has a Ph.D. in Political Science and a J.D., and has taught Political Science for 35 years. He was an international election observer in El Salvador’s 1994 presidential election. He co-wrote and edited the International Election Observer report to the United Nations.

[onenote]

93. yes. I've seen this. And if the plaintiffs think the Edison polling

was an "effective method for projecting election results" I'm having trouble seeing how Edison (and the networks could be part of the alleged criminal enterprise (which I take it is the alleged tampering with actual voting results by someone). So I'm still at a loss as to how there is a legal claim against Edison or the networks for engaging in polling. I suppose the claim might be that by not polling they're participating in a cover up of future tampering, but that claim is entirely speculative, wouldn't require disclosure of past raw data to prove some sort of conspiracy to stop polling, and suffers from a significant defect -- the fact that they chose not to do any more exit polling doesn't stop anyone else from doing their own exit polls.

[KULawHawk]

94. It's not the only lawsuit.

Getting the full data is only part of the review, and those numbers have to be verified and then analysis of the Voting totals and discrepancy with machines and what was reported.

You need all of A to fully review B.

[onenote]

95. And you still need a cause of action against the folks being sued

And I haven't heard what that cause of action is when it comes to the networks and polling organization.

Consider the following: A market research group hires a polling organization to research grocery store purchases, specifically whether customers are buying more Del Monte Green Beans or more Green Giant Green Beans.

So they set up shop outside a supermarket and randomly poll people exiting the store. If they say they bought green beans, they ask them what brand. They also collect other demographic data. Ultimately, they determine that 75% of those saying they bought green beans said they bought Del Monte and only 25 % bought Green Giant. This data is then compared to the stores records of every sale made that day and those records say that the actual sales were 50 percent Del Monte and 50 percent Green Giant.

Del Monte reads a report of this research and the discrepancy between the polling results and the sales recorded by the store and, naturally, is upset, thinking that the store is shorting them and recording sales of their beans as sales of Green Giants beans.

So they want to sue. They could sue the store and cite to the research as suggesting that the store is playing fast and loose. The store would argue back that their records are unassailable and that the polling results, based on what buyers say, is less reliable than the actual sales records. Meanwhile, there is no basis for Del Monte to sue the market research company since if they got it wrong it kills Del Monte's suit. And there's no reason for them to need the raw data, demographic numbers etc. since the latter doesn't have diddly to do with anything relevant to the claim against the store and the former can only hurt Del Monte's case if it turns out that someone put some numbers in the wrong column but adds nothing if the recorded surveys match up to the summary data report.

And then let's say the market research company decides to stop conducting such surveys. So Del Monte sues them for conspiring with the stores to cover up the stores shady practices by not conducting research. If, and if its a big if, that complaint survives a motion to dismiss, Del Monte might be able to get discovery on the issue of whether there was evidence of a conspiracy to stop doing surveys to cover up the store's tampering. But the data collected when surveys were being collected wouldn't be relevant to that claim.

Anyway, I look forward to seeing these complaints.

[KULawHawk]

44. Significance of the data incongruity :

Same data analysis for all states so far. If you’re not a numbers person, it shows the Exit Poll numbers, the reported vote numbers, the variance of discrepancy between the exit polls and election results, the confidence level, and the last column is the telling number, the probability of election / voting fraud.

Realize, in a lot of countries, a discrepancy between the election results and exit polls of more than 3% trigger an automatic investigation and full recount. Exit polls are one of the strongest tools to inspect and catch election fraud.

It's such a trusted tool the US government paid for having complete exit polling in Rwanda’s Presidential election because they had such a bad and long history of election stealing. Exit polls did end up catching fraud and the real winner actually won the election by 6% when initial results showed him losing to his opponent by 3%.

By the way, after news of people looking at the discrepancies, the DNC decided to stop having Exit Polling conducted. There were no Exit Polls in Kentucky or Oregon, and they are cancelling Exit Polling in California, New Jersey and the rest of the remaining states. Why?




Voting machine fraud and fractional tallying.

http://blackboxvoting.org/

About Black Box Voting:


Bev Harris is a writer and founder of Black Box Voting. She has researched and written about election transparency and computerized voting systems since 2002. Harris was featured in the Emmy-nominated HBO documentary Hacking Democracy, and is the author of Black Box Voting: Ballot Tampering in the 21st Century, a book purchased by the White House Library and also reportedly found on Osama bin Laden’s bookshelf. Harris’s research has been covered in The New York Times, Vanity Fair, Time Magazine, CNN and several international publications, including the Philippine Daily Inquirer and Agence France Presse.

Bennie Smith is a Memphis-based application developer for an electrical manufacturing company. He is also a political strategist who has developed a micro-targeting application that predicts voter turnout. In August 2014 he was approached by a number of candidates who insisted that their elections had been stolen. He disagreed with the group and offered to look into how the system works. After discovering a number of irregularities, Smith began to research how votes that originate from the same source can change once they get into the GEMS vote tabulation program. Smith’s attention to these anomalies uncovered an extraordinarily high-risk tampering mechanism and ultimately provided a new infrastructure for analyzing questionable election results.


Palast on Larry King’s PoliticKing:
‘We don’t count all the votes.’

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[hopemountain]

99. oregon is all mail in ballots, hence

no exit polling.

[MFM008]

52. 10 days left for this crap

[nc4bo]

54. it was not crap in 2004.

Now was it?

[nadinbrzezinski]

77. Or 2000

[Duckfan]

97. I love Bob and Cliff

Kickin ass and taking names later.

[larkrake]

53. I wish exit poles had sway in courts

[KULawHawk]

82. They do

In some states and most countries, a discrepancy between the exit poll and reported vote numbers triggers an automatic investigation.

People in the US have a hard time accepting or wanting to accept that rigged system elections are going on because it's a core value of perceived American Democracy

[Thinkingabout]

55. Nothing to see here, same old line without proof as usual,

Now advancing on a stage is a problem, this is something to be concerned.

[Agnosticsherbet]

57. So you think an exit poll where they ask ever 5th voter, and take only those that volunteer to

answer are better determination of who won than counting the actual votes?

Shakes head.
LOL
Shakes head, again.

[libdem4life]

65. You must be young. Shakes head.

[Agnosticsherbet]

66. So you actually do believe that exit polls are more accurate that counting every vote.

Good enough.

[libdem4life]

67. They have been reliable markers for decades.

Stop putting works in my post. No one said more accurate...that's hysteria talking. Good indicaters...absolutely. Like I said, 5 decades of elections...have a pretty good grasp on a couple of things.

[Agnosticsherbet]

68. Actually, they haven't. Exit Polls: Why They So Often Mislead

Exit Polls: Why They So Often Mislead

An excellent article that shows how and why they are wrong.

[libdem4life]

71. Sorry...doesn't explain the vast difference between candidates in the

same party. Smell test? Fail.

Mislead and wrong...are not synonyms. And again, I said indicators...not rule of law. No one is going to elect anyone based on them, but this is a fruitless case of Bubble Politics. Maybe it's the Bernie avatar?

[Agnosticsherbet]

72. Exit polls are not the accurate accounting that urban legend makes them.

An excellent post from April here at DU.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511645813#post18

It appears that, once you dig into their real accuracy, a lot of what we have been told about exit polls is just bullshit.

Count the real votes, not just the people who want to talk to a reporter.

[libdem4life]

73. Ok, then. Maybe HRC people don't like reporters...

because the discrepancy is pretty obvious. Unless, of course, this is just a VRWC.

[Agnosticsherbet]

75. Or the polls are no more accurate or scientific than an internet poll.

[Hiraeth]

107. Are you willing to swear (in a court of law) every vote has been accurately counted?

Are you that sure of your statement.

[randome]

59. CALL BERNIE SANDERS RIGHT FUCKING NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[brooklynite]

69. ...and ask him if his refrigerator's running?

[brooklynite]

70. This reminds me: how's that "People's Exit Poll" plan coming along?

[randome]

88. Yeah, like how bloggers are 'journalists' and citizen pollsters are 'reliable'.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[DrDan]

102. no, to ask him how to turn off the caps-lock key

[PepperHarlan]

62. The audio quality is terrible

[libdem4life]

64. In all my decades of voting, Exit Polls have almost always been very close

to the actual voting. That they are not, and that it affects only one candidate (I did not listen to the above tape) says a lot. And many don't want to hear it. I don't want to hear it.

Perhaps we need to get some Poll Watchers from the South of the Border countries where Jimmy Carter taught them how to have honest elections. Or perhaps he could run a public service training ... maybe online ... to train American Poll Watchers.

[trudyco]

89. So Hillary is not the target, she's the victim.

This is going to be interesting. I would think she'd know if the system is being gamed in her favor. They have to have internal polling, but for all I know she is being used. Sounds like a Rove move. They figured she'd tank in the GE and they will put in a Repub approved VP to manage Trump.

[Peace Patriot]

103. There is no more important issue than these 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines...

...as I've been saying at DU for more than a decade now.

One third of our elections cannot be verified! And the rest are not being verified!

Get it? The corporate fuckers have taken over the very counting of our votes, using 'TRADE SECRET' programming code--code that the public is forbidden to review--and with ONE THIRD of the states in the USA doing NO AUDIT AT ALL (no paper ballot) and the rest doing a miserably inadequate audit (comparison of ballots to electronic totals).

That IS the situation!

If you can stand the poor quality of this vid and presentation, you will learn a lot of what you need to know to understand this appalling truth. The You Tube vids they show are people who know what they are talking about--Jonathan Simon, Mark Crispin Miller, Stephen Spoonamore, Brad Friedman and others--and speak about it clearly and precisely.

One of the participants who was there at the meeting (one of the men, I think it was Bob Fritakis) said the question now is, "Who is doing it?" Not just that elections are being rigged, and not just who is benefiting, but who is programming the 'TRADE SECRET' code in machines that are designed to make them easy to rig?

I would like to know the answer to that question. Back in 2004, there is little question that Karl Rove either directly flipped votes in Ohio, or had such an in with the Bush-Cheney "Ranger" (big donor) who ran Diebold that all he had to do was ask. ES&S later bought out Diebold, and that company, ES&S, was originally funded by Howard Ahmanson, a far RW xhristian billionaire who also gave one million dollars to the far RW xhristian Chalecedon foundation, which touts the death penalty for homosexuals!

You think "faith-based" voting is okay? You got it!

But, frankly, I don't think our corpo-militarist rulers would leave the awesome power of 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting in the hands of xhristian nutballs. I think it may now be in the hands of even more dangerous people, or--another hypothesis--there is a secret exchequer where our elections are bought and sold, and you need really big bucks to participate in it.

THAT is what we are now vulnerable to. Our elections have been PRIVATIZED even to the very counting of our votes. The counting of our votes is no longer in the PUBLIC VENUE.

When Sanders was winning, I entertained the thought that he might be the CIA stealth candidate.** I really did think this, because I KNOW how riggable these systems are.

------------------------------

**(I thought this possible because there are reasons why the CIA wouldn't trust Hillary Clinton--i.e., her private email server national security breaches and rogue operations like Libya--nor do I think they want the Neo-Cons back in the White House, and it's pretty evident from Clinton's advisers(such as Robert Kagan) that that is what the Neo-Cons intend. Do recall that the Neo-Cons outed the CIA's entire worldwide WMD non-proliferation project, back in 2003. I thought perhaps they'd decided to let Bernie keep our rebelling people in control with better social programs and they could live with his foreign policy which is not pacifist and not anti-war but stresses diplomacy (--a mode that I think the CIA actually prefers over outright war). Also, the CIA is a good candidate for an entity powerful enough to wrest control of the 'TRADE SECRET' code voting machines from the original riggers, who put Neo-Cons Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld in power. The trouble is that the CIA is also a likely entity to use such a power in a general scheme to control the President, rather than to keep someone out whom they don't trust. They would also use, rather than reveal, the contents of Clinton's email server as a control mechanism. I think Clinton is wide open to such blackmail. We'll see what happens in California, but currently it looks like whoever controls the 'TRADE SECRET' voting machines have their candidate, and it's not Bernie.)

-----------------------------------------------


Dear DU, both Clinton supporters and Bernie supporters:

I think most of you are naive about how this country is really run. Clinton supporters will probably never see out of "the Matrix" that our political life has become. Bernie supporters might be able to see it, as a result of this campaign. I've advocated for my candidate like all of you, but I've also been thinking, "It's not going to be up to us. It just isn't. The voting system is totally riggable." Are our elections--especially for president--being left to chance, when the system is so blatantly riggable? I don't think so. Nothing this important will be left to chance by the corpo-militarists who rule over us.

Peace

[Freddie Stubbs]

108. A YouTube video is not a lawsuit

[Cali_Democrat]

111. This is true. nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

112. Has any lawsuit actually been filed yet?