Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Cliff Arnebeck

(305 posts)

1. My difference with the concluding remark of Lou Dubose's article

Reply to Cliff Arnebeck (Original post)

Tue Aug 11, 2015, 10:58 PM

Aug 2015

Last edited Wed Aug 12, 2015, 12:52 AM - Edit history (2)

The Ohio investigative reporting and litigation against ES&S and OSS Husted and the FBI's presence in the office of OSS Husted on election day were surely known to ES&S executives who would have had to pull the triggers on the fixes arranged in other swing states. I think the spotlight upon the "experimental patches" in the Ohio 2012 Presidential election protected the integrity of the elections in all the states that President Obama needed to win.

Furthermore, the reality of President Obama's DOJ and FBI cyber security team monitoring secretary of states' offices for fraudulent manipulation of vote counts has closed the door to electronic vote theft for the 2016 season.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

1 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why Karl Rove will not be able to steal the 2016 Presidential election [View all] Cliff Arnebeck Aug 2015 OP

My difference with the concluding remark of Lou Dubose's article Cliff Arnebeck Aug 2015 #1