America's Voting Fraud | Worst Machines | Hanging Chad Vote Fraud
THE LONG HISTORY OF TAMPERING WITH THE VOTE
RIGGING THE ELECTION IN AMERICA
YOU ONLY NEED TO HACK ONE SWING STATE TO PULL IT OFF
2016 HOW TO HACK AN ELECTION - Remember it's not who votes but who COUNTS THE VOTES - that counts - GET IT !!!
Ocean's Election: Rigging the System, Vegas-Style
- Mexican Elections Hacked
- Consider the U.S. presidential election gets rigged
- US election databases and voter information are being targeted in state-sponsored attacks, two states's databases believed to have been compromised.
- FBI says foreign hackers penetrated state election systems
Clinton Campaign: Russia Rigging US Election by Exposing How We Rigged Election. Russia is manipulating the 2016 U.S. presidential election by leaking hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) servers — emails that show the DNC rigged and manipulated the Democratic primary in favor of Hillary Clinton. Call it an exercise in hypocrisy, or call it a deflection to detract from the fact that America’s political process is corrupt beyond belief.
Lee Camp has covered the Presidential primary election fraud. In this segment, Lee recaps every aspect that he's uncovered. From Stanford studies, to to hacked voting machines, to superdelegate conflicts of interest, to purged voting rolls, here's everything you need to know..
9/15/15 Hanging chad redux? US heading for 2000 - style election catastrophe.
Voting technology deployed by most states across the US is now so antiquated it is in danger of breaking down, experts say
The United States is heading for another catastrophe in its voting system equivalent to the notorious “hanging chad” affair that shook the country in 2000 and propelled George W Bush into the White House, experts on electoral procedures are warning. The voting technology deployed by most states around the country is now so antiquated and unreliable that it is in danger of breaking down at any time, the experts say. Some states are having to go on eBay to buy spare parts for machines that are no longer manufactured. The extent of decay in America’s electoral infrastructure is laid bare in a new report from the Brennan Center, a nonpartisan institute at the New York University School of Law specializing in democracy and justice. Having consulted more than 100 voting specialists in all 50 states, the center concludes that the country is facing an impending crisis in the way it conducts elections. As Louisiana’s secretary of state Tom Schedler put it to an official hearing recently: “It’s getting a little scary out there.” With the presidential election of November 2016 fast approaching, it is already very late in the cycle for states to be able to update their technology in time. Yet most states are operating voting machines that are perilously close to exceeding their sell-by-date, Brennan has found. The center discovered that at least 31 states have recognized they need to buy new voting machines within the next five years, yet, of those, 22 said they had no idea how they were going to pay for them. The jurisdictions with equipment reaching the end of its natural lifespan cover about 40 million registered voters, and account for 387 of the 538 electoral college votes that decide the presidency. In a further stark finding, Brennan found that 43 states are using machines that by election day next year will be at least 10 years old, while 14 states will have machines at least 15 years old. Bearing in mind that today’s iteration of voting equipment is computer-driven, the technology is ageing fast. Lawrence Norden, co-author of the Brennan report, said that voting machines were no different from laptops in the sense that they rarely survived for 15 years. “That’s what we are seeing today with voting machines – we are reaching the end of their lifetime.” Norden said that despite the nationwide scope of the problem, little was being invested in finding a solution. “No one is expressing any interest in paying for new machines. Congress has shown absolutely no interest in doing so.” He went on: “We wouldn’t do this with anything else – you wouldn’t wait for your fire truck to breakdown before replacing it.” The risks involved in conducting a presidential election with flakey technology in one of the globe’s largest and most complex democracies were amply displayed in 2000. The nail-bitingly close contest between Bush and Al Gore went down to the wire in Florida, where recounts were ordered because of failing paper-based punch machines. The prolonged furore reached the US supreme court and introduced the world to arcane terminology such as “hanging chads” and “butterfly ballots”. In the end, some 172,000 mis-votes were recorded. The supreme court ended the recounts in December 2000, which meant Florida’s votes went to Bush, handing him the election despite Gore’s 0.5% edge in the national popular vote. In the wake of the national embarrassment over the election, most states moved to bring on a new generation of voting machines. That decision has, ironically, led to today’s pending crisis.
Call 1-866-687-8683 or 866ourvote to report election problems
7/17/15 Virginia Finally Drops America's WORST VOTING MACHINES IF YOU VOTED in a Virginia election any time between 2003 and April of this year, your vote was at serious risk of being compromised by hackers. That’s the assessment reached by Virginia’s board of elections, which recently decertified some 3,000 WINVote touchscreen voting machines after learning about security problems with the systems, including a poorly secured Wi-Fi feature for tallying votes. The problems with the machines are so severe that Jeremy Epstein, a computer scientist with SRI International who tried for years to get them banned, called them the worst voting machines in the country. If the WINVote systems weren’t hacked in a past election, he noted in a recent blog post and during a presentation last week at the USENIX security conference, “it was only because no one tried.”
11/3/08 Touchscreen voting machines at the center of recent vote-flipping reports can be easily and maliciously recalibrated in the field to favor one candidate in a race, according to a report prepared by computer scientists for the state of Ohio.
A computer programmer reveals how he was asked to provide the GOP with some special software that would allow rigging the 2004 election without being detected. Ohio Presidential Election was hacked. A computer programmer reveals how he was asked to provide the GOP with some special software that would allow rigging the 2004 election without being detected. (English, with Italian subtitles).
Remember 'It's Not the People Who Vote that Count; It's the People Who Count the Votes' ~ Stalin
Princeton Scientists say Diebold Ballot Boxes Will Be 100% Hackable 2006 research paper. Learn how to Hack a Diebold machine Near You. US Department of Energy discovered when they successfully hacked into a Diebold electronic voting machine - and were able to change voting results.without leaving a trace
The 2 Princton Kids who did the paper and Ed Felton on Fox News. The diebold machine was corrupted (rigged) before anyone started to vote - there is no trail showing that it had been tampered with and there is no paper trail that shows what really happened.
"Diebold put a picture of the key that opens their voting machines online. Yes, the key--one key opens all of their machines. Result? Someone was able to copy it using the photo on the website." ~
Fox News has once again identified a Republican as a Democrat and vice-versa.
October 4th 2006 Fox News labeled disgraced Republican Mark Foley as a Democrat multiple times in one night and they've done it again today, reversing the party affiliation of Sheldon Whitehouse and Lincoln Chafee in the Rhode Island Senate race.
WATCH - OUTFOXED
Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism Bravenew Films 1 hr 17 min 41 sec Sep 14, 2004
Outfoxed examines how media empires, led by Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, have been running a "race to the bottom" in television news. This film provides an in-depth look at Fox News and the dangers of ever-enlarging corporations taking control of the public's right to know. Watch the first 10 minutes of it.
Voting Machine Fraud
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 03:14:39 -0400
From: "Rebecca Mercuri"
Subject: Florida Primary 2002: Back to the Future Well, Florida's done it again.
Tuesday's Florida primary election marked its first large-scale roll-out of tens of thousands of brand-new voting machines that were promised to resolve the problems of the 2000 Presidential election. Instead, from the very moment the polls were supposed to open, problems emerged throughout the state, especially in counties that had spent millions of dollars to purchase touchscreen electronic balloting devices.
Florida voters, including Gubernatorial candidate Janet Reno, experienced delays (ranging from minutes to hours) due to touchscreen machines not working properly or at all. Reno, and others (including Duval County officials) reportedly sought court orders requesting additional time for the day's voting session. Governor Jeb Bush granted a two hour extension, but some of the polling places did not receive notice and shut down their machines at 7PM, only to discover that restart was impossible because of the way the machines had been designed.
In addition to polls and machines that opened late, many precincts reported problems with some electronic cards voters used to activate their ballots. A few machines in Miami-Dade County reset themselves while voters were trying to vote. Even the mark-sense ballots proved troublesome -- in Orange County many votes will have to be hand-counted because defects made them unreadable by the optical scanners.
Lest readers think that Florida is alone with these election problems, other states, including Georgia and Maryland, have also reported similar difficulties with touchscreens. Problems in MD led 4 counties there to commission a report from UMD, which revealed serious reliability concerns, due to "catastrophic failure," "malfunction," and "unusability" of one of the two machines they were given for testing. The Association of Computing Machinery's Special Interest Group on Computer Human Interaction (ACM SIGCHI) offered to perform similar evaluations on Palm Beach's new voting equipment, urged by U.S. Representative Robert Wexler, but the offer was declined by the County's Board of Elections.
Florida was forewarned about problems with some of their new machines when, in local municipal elections held back in March 2002, anomalies surfaced in Palm Beach County. Some voters submitted sworn affidavits to the state's 15th Circuit Court, attesting to problems ranging from a lack of privacy at the voting booth, to machines "freezing up" until rebooted or reset, and voter cards being rejected.
During this past summer, as part of an investigation into Emil Danciu's contest (one of two lawsuits for the March Palm Beach County election), the court permitted me to perform a "walk through inspection" of the County's Board of Election warehouse where the machines were being stored and prepared for this Fall's primary. To my amazement, I learned that the devices would not be tested to see whether they would register a vote for each candidate that appeared on the ballot face. Rather, the tallying system was checked by transferring data between cartridges, (circumventing the ballot face on each machine) and only one vote, for the first candidate in each race, was cast using the touchscreen. This essentially meant that most of the new machines would get their first real use only at the actual election. (Not only does this testing lack rigour, but it only marginally complies with Florida election law.)
The Palm Beach County machines were running new software too, since the firmware on each of their 3400 machines was reprogrammed just weeks before the Fall primary. (Such firmware reprogrammability represents a major security and auditability risk.) A thorough inspection of the machines, requested by Danciu's legal team, was denied by the court, on the grounds that the purchase contract with Election Supervisor Teresa LaPore made it a felony violation (for her) of the vendor's trade secret clause if any devices were provided (Danciu had even offered to pay for one) for an internal examination. This trade secrecy also apparently prevents disclosure of the program code files and testing reports maintained by the state of Florida as part of their certification process.
But there's more. Further problems may begin to surface after the tabulation results are analyzed. Although if any candidate wishes to seek a recount, the only one they will get from the touchscreen machines is a printout of the same electronic data residing inside of the machines -- not an independent tally from human-readable ballots that were examined by the voters who cast them on election day. Even Brazil, where 400,000 fully-electronic voting machines were first deployed nation-wide in their 2000 election, deemed it appropriate to retrofit their machines to produce recountable voter-verifiable paper ballots, and they will begin to institute this by modifying some 3% of their machines for their next election.
Sadly, many US communities seem to feel that it is necessary to rush ahead with voting equipment procurements, while reliable systems, appropriate testing, usability, security, and auditability procedures, and other safeguards, are years away. Florida 2000 woke us up to what many already knew -- our voting systems and laws were flawed. Florida 2002 lets us know that expensive computers can not and will not provide the answer to our election troubles.
For the short run, communities that have purchased malfunctioning equipment should return it to the manufacturers and request refunds. There should be an immediate moratorium throughout the United States (and world) on the procurement of electronic voting systems that do not provide voter-verifiable paper ballots. In other words, if your community is thinking of buying touchscreen or other fully-computerized voting equipment, don't let them do it! Candidates and voters who believe they may have evidence of ballots being lost or foul-play with voting systems, should contact me, as soon as possible, at mercuri at acm.org in order to learn how data could be secured before it may be deleted. Those seeking additional information on voting systems can refer to the numerous articles linked on Peter Neumann's website and on mine (at www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html).
Here is the senate testimony of a programmer describing how he was paid to write software that would rig the Ohio election in 2000.
Please let your voice and concerns be heard. Democracy is at stake.
Rebecca Mercuri, Ph.D., Bryn Mawr College
*This article is copyrighted property of Rebecca Mercuri (c) 2002.
The Real Scandal [... "DREs are even worse," says Rebecca Mercuri, a computer scientist at Bryn Mawr who's studied computerized elections for more than 10 years and recently finished her doctoral dissertation on that exact topic at the University of Pennsylvania. DREs leave no "audit trail" (paper trail) whatsoever, she points out. Votes are recorded directly onto a memory cartridge. There is absolutely nothing to ensure that the vote that registers on the screen is the vote that gets recorded on the cartridge, or that the vote that is recorded on the cartridge is the vote that prints out on paper. "Unless the voter sees that paper trail, how do they know?" she says. "I could teach a 12-year-old to write a program that shows one thing on the screen and another thing on the printout." While some newer election computing companies say they've figured out how to create a foolproof electronic audit trail, Mercuri dismisses such claims as "preposterous." There's no way to make sure that software is 100 percent pure. "If we could do that in computer science, we'd have the virus problem solved," she says. ...]
Most States Now Offering Campaign Data Online
The US Public Policy Committee of the ACM has released a study on statewide voter registration databases. We looked at accurancy, privacy, usability, security, and reliability issues of such databases.
The home page for the study is http://www.acm.org/usacm/VRD/ ; it contains the committee membership, executive study, and (of course) a link to the full study.
Douglas Jones University of Iowa associate professor
of computer science has become a leading expert on voting security in the United States and heads the Iowa State Board of Voting Machines and launched a National Science Foundation project called ACCURATE, or A Center for Correct, Usable, Reliable, Auditable and Transparent Elections. Jones said hand-marked paper ballots that can be counted by local machines are probably the best ballot choice.
Project Vote Smart
A national library of factual information on 40,000 candidates for public office including President of the United States to state legislature to local elected officials. We cover them in five basic areas: backgrounds, issue positions, voting records, campaign finances and performance evaluations made by over 100 liberal to conservative special interest groups.
In addition we interview presidential, congressional, gubernatorial and state legislative candidates and provide special services on issues for journalists, teachers and students. All information and services can be obtained in the following ways:
* The Voter's Research Hotline 1-800-622-SMART
* The Voter's Self-Denfense Manual
Information available through the above sources:
- Biographical and Political Backgrounds
- Addresses and Phone Numbers
- Voting Records
- Campaign Finance Data
Dylan It's All Right, Ma: 1965
HIPPIES DIDN'T JUST GIVE YOU
SEX, DRUGS, AND ROCK AND ROLL
HIPPIES GAVE YOU THE INTERNET!
While preachers preach of evil fates
Teachers teach that knowledge waits
Can lead to hundred-dollar plates
Goodness hides behind its gates
But even the president of the United States
Sometimes must have
To stand naked.
20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA voting fraud election fraud voting machines Diebold ES&S voting verifiability exit polls Sequoia Voting Systems McCarthy Help America Vote Act
Did you know....
1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S. Two voting companies & two brothers will count 80 percent of U.S. election using both scanners & touchscreens.
2. There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry.
Disputed - see .eac.gov
3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.
4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."
5. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S. He became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.
6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.
7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates.
8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.
9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.
10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.
11. Diebold is based in Ohio.
12. Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as consultants and developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html13. Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of Global Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold. Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.
14. Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years. http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf
15. None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio.
16. California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it!
(See the movie here: http://www.bbvdocs.org/videos/baxterVPR.mov.) http://wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,63298,00.html
17. 30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.
18. All -- not some -- but ALL the voting machine errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.
19. The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's brother.
20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending further investigation.
http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOut.htm and http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,10801,97614,00.html and http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/tens_of_thousands.html and http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm and http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html