The Data Analysts Who Believe They’ve Uncovered Widespread Illegal Voting in Georgia
By: Ryan Mills (National Review)
Something is out of whack. The absence of post-election analysis being reported doesn't inspire confidence. In the month following a Presidential election, typically the preliminary granular results have been parsed and reported. Granted exit poll data for the 2020 election would be very unreliable. But still, the lack of post-election analysis is glaringly noticeable in its absence.
The 2020 election was, if not a Red wave, a Red ripple. The down ballot election results are diametrically opposed to the Presidential results. Under normal circumstances the 2020 election would be characterized as a repudiation of Democrats. The intraparty bickering within the Democratic Party really does indicate that Democrats are aware they were rejected by voters. The silence is deafening.
There really is sufficient evidence to indicate that voting irregularities are increasing. While that is more likely to be the result of bureaucratic laziness rather than some sinister conspiratorial plot, nevertheless the increase in voting irregularities should be raising alarms. Weaknesses in election security and integrity provides an opening for exploitation by opportunists just as with any other data collection system.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
For two decades, Mark Alan Davis has urged Georgia’s leaders to clean the state’s voter rolls, and fix data errors that he feared could throw the state’s elections into doubt.
A voting consultant and data expert whose father was the Republican nominee for governor back in the mid 1980s, Davis described himself as kind of a “nerd” that “people may or may not find interesting.” But, he said, his concerns about the state’s election integrity have never risen to the top of most elected leaders’ to-do lists. Until now.
Davis was one of three data experts whose work is at the center of a Georgia lawsuit alleging that tens of thousands of illegal votes may have been cast in November’s general election, according to court documents obtained by National Review.
The experts assert in affidavits filed with the lawsuit that Georgia’s voting system has numerous “control deficiencies” and “unreliable data governance policies” that increase the risk of “invalid or fraudulent votes being counted without detection.” The findings, they say, cast doubt not only on the 2020 presidential election, but elections going back “many, many years.”
The lawsuit, filed by the Georgia Republican Party Chairman David Shafer and the Trump campaign, relies on the work of the data experts to allege that thousands of illegal votes were cast in the election, including by felons, children, and non-residents, and even in the name of people who are dead, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit argues that because a “sufficient number of illegal votes” were allowed to be counted in the vote totals, “the declaration of the presidential election in favor of Mr. (Joe) Biden must be enjoined, vacated and nullified.”
The Georgia lawsuit is the latest in a string of Republican legal challenges to the election that have failed to gain traction in states across the country.
Shafer said on Twitter that, unlike other lawsuits challenging the election results, this most recent lawsuit in Georgia doesn’t rely on theories about hacked voting machines.
“Instead,” he wrote, “we painstakingly show thousands of examples of ‘low tech’ voting irregularities and fraud sufficient in scale to place the election result in doubt.”
In an email, Walter Jones, a spokesman for Georgia’s secretary of state Brad Raffensperger, was dismissive of the claims laid out in the 1,500 pages of documents filed with the lawsuit.
“Respected and impartial election experts give no credence to the shoddy ‘analysis’ that this lawsuit is based on,” he wrote. “And ‘analysis’ is not evidence. It is supposition and conjecture built on subjective assumptions. As the saying goes, ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.’”
In addition to Davis, the other data experts whose work is central to the lawsuit are Matt Braynard, a GOP operative and former Trump campaign consultant and data specialist who is behind the crowd-funded Voter Integrity Project, and Bryan Geels, a data analytics risk-assessment expert based in Seattle, Wash.
Davis, Braynard, and Geels worked independently, but each utilized a variety of state and national databases for their analyses, including: Georgia voter-registration files, absentee and early voter files, voter-history files, and a national address-change database.
In an affidavit, Davis said that he identified 14,980 people who voted after moving out of state. He also found 40,279 people who moved across county lines more than 30 days before the election, but then cast a ballot in their former county.
Some may be students and people serving in the military, he said. “But I think the vast majority of these probably were permanent moves.”
In his affidavit, Davis said “it appears to me we probably had tens of thousands of illegal votes cast in our last election. Worse, that has probably been happening for many, many years.”
Braynard said he has been running his Voter Integrity Project out of his two-bed, two-bath apartment in the Washington, D.C., area. He’s had a team of up to 20 people helping him.
“Everything we’re putting together here at [the Voter Integrity Project] should be very accessible, completely understandable,” Braynard said in a video discussing his findings. He said he is doing similar work in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin.
Braynard raised more than $674,000 for his efforts on the Christian crowdfunding site GiveSendGo. He was booted off of the GoFundMe crowdfunding site because the site determined his effort “attempts to spread misleading information about the election.” He’s also being paid $40,000 to serve as an expert witness, according to court documents.
Braynard found there were at least 20,312 cases of voters who illegally cast ballots in Georgia, “due to their loss of residency status,” according to his affidavit. He also said he found at least 395 people who voted in multiple states, including in Georgia, and 1,043 voters who illegally registered using a post-office box disguised as a residential address. Biden won the state by roughly 12,000 votes, according to state officials who certified his victory ahead of the Tuesday safe harbor deadline.
“We were able to identify quite a few anomalies,” Braynard said in an interview.
Braynard said his analysis was limited by his access to data. There are some databases, like driver’s license databases, that he couldn’t access, he said. And the government redacted some fields from the databases he does have access to.
“I’m only trying to bring this up to get the states to do the proper investigation with the tools that only they have,” Braynard said. “I’ve used every tool I have as a private citizen. Only the government can take the next step.”
The court documents include pages upon pages of names that Braynard’s team identified as being likely illegal voters. His team hasn’t reached out to any of them, he said.
“What am I going to do,” he asked, “trick them into confessing to a federal crime, or at least a state crime?”
In his affidavit, Geels, the data-analytics and risk-assessment expert in Seattle, said he identified 4,502 people who voted in Georgia despite not being registered. He also said he found as many as 2,560 inmates who cast ballots, 66,247 people who cast ballots who registered to vote before their 17th birthday, and as many as 10,315 people who cast ballots who were dead before Election Day.
Geels is being paid $15,000 to serve as an expert witness, according to court documents.
In his affidavit, Geels said he found several significant record keeping and data integrity issues with the state’s voter data. Georgia’s voting system, he said, “has numerous control deficiencies including unreliable data governance policies to help ensure that votes cast and counted are valid,” and without proper controls “there is an increased risk of invalid or fraudulent votes being counted without detection.”
“It is my opinion that the data relied upon by the Georgia secretary of state and county election officials is either not trustworthy and cannot have been relied upon to conduct an election without serious risk of fraud,” he said in his affidavit, “or, alternatively, if it is good data, indicates a significant number of fraudulent or invalid votes of a magnitude which calls into question the outcome of the presidential election.”
Geels declined to comment on his findings when reached on the phone. Davis and Braynard have said they found little evidence of large numbers of ballots cast in the names of the dead. “It looks to me like for the most part the Secretary of State is getting that right,” Davis said.
The lawsuit does contain allegations by two Georgia residents about questionable voting histories for their dead relatives.
In an affidavit, a woman named Lisa Holst said that her father-in-law, who died 10 years ago, received three absentee ballots in the mail this year. A review of his voting record showed someone cast a ballot in his name in 2017 and 2020, according to the court documents.
Holst declined to comment when reached on the phone, saying she doesn’t trust the media.
Another woman, Sandy Rumph, said in an affidavit that she checked the voter records for her father-in-law, who died a year ago, and found that his voter registration changed from “Deceased” to “Active” eight days after his death. And his address was changed to an apartment in a county where he never lived.
She said somebody requested a copy of his driver’s license be delivered to the bogus address.
Rumph said she doesn’t believe that anyone actually cast a vote in her father-in-law’s name in the general election, but she’s worried someone still could.
“There is still the potential in this runoff election, because he’s still in active status that someone could go vote” Rumph said. “My concern was how easy this was, and there’s no telling how widespread it is.”
Tags
Who is online
134 visitors
Something is out of whack with our elections. Placing our heads in the sand won't address the increasing number of voting irregularities.
IMO woefully lax measures to protect personal identity are now being exploited to influence elections. Allowing multi-national businesses to exploit our identities for profit hasn't been a good idea, after all. What's good for Wall Street is usually bad for the rest of us.
thanks for seeding this article. it'll be nice to know which NT peers believe fact free delusional bullshit.
they sure do love their lost causes ...
I think we already know who will believe that.
Will you post a seed when we get some adjudicated facts on this lawsuit? Anyone can file a lawsuit and make allegations. What matters is the truth. Given this has the ultimate objective of reversing the results (explicitly stated) it likely is yet another Hail Mary.
Basically I am saying that this is getting really old. I want to see some verified facts rather than these incessant claims.
I know. How many times does it have to be said - ‘analysis’ is not evidence? It's really getting stupid as well as old.
I am afraid they will keep doing it until their Trump comes home
The lawsuits are exploiting the data analysis for a political purpose. Misuse doesn't invalidate the data analysis.
The data analysis isn't different than other types of scientific inquiries and analyses. It's certainly possible to claim there was bias in in the data analysis; a type of bad science. It's certainly possible to misuse the data analysis to pursue political goals; a type of scientific abuse. It's certainly possible to claim the data analysis wasn't performed following best practice; a type of lax scientific integrity.
But people are not dismissing the data analysis because it's bad science, lacks scientific integrity, or is being misused. People are dismissing the data analysis because the results do not conform to what they want to believe. People are being motivated by beliefs and not by evidence.
Show me the evidence
Show me the data. So far only gross aggregate data has been reported. The absence of post-election analysis doesn't inspire confidence.
I cannot speak for people in general. But I want to see corroborated data, not claims.
It would seem if data analysts are analyzing data that they must have some data to analyze.....
According to the seeded article, yes. But there seems to be a desire to completely ignore that analysis rather than learn something from it.
Consider that there was a well funded and organized effort among some Republicans to remove Trump. Remember the Lincoln Project? The 2020 election may have provided a proof of concept.
What if Joe Biden won the election because a group of disgruntled Republicans gamed the system? Wouldn't that explain the down ballot failure of Democrats? If flaws and weaknesses in the administration of elections were exploited successfully then there is an incentive to build upon that success for future elections.
Or... What if Joe Biden won the election because a group of disgruntled Republicans voted for Biden? It is far past time to use Occam"s razor on this. You and others can dream up all kinds of conspiracy theories, but the simplest and most straightforward reason that Biden got more votes than Trump is that Biden got more votes than Trump.
Which is what I am afraid of going forward: Trump will have taught America that it doesn't really matter who wins an election if they can just hang out and spew enough hatred, fear and lies till the rabble support the overthrow of legal government.
Yes, it's certainly plausible that disgruntled Republicans voted for Biden. Although it would appear those disgruntled Republicans remained loyal down ballot.
The election wasn't only about selecting and electing a President. The Presidency is only one elected office.
The concern should be the apparent concentration of power in the Presidency. The argument that only the Presidential election is of importance diminishes the significance of other elected offices. And by placing too much power in one elected office the incentives for gaming elections become much greater.
Looking at the election as a whole, Trump led Republicans to victory overall if the votes are valid. The national government (Federal, state, and local) has leaned decidedly in favor of Republicans. Biden inherits a national government in which he can only use the power of the Presidency in a dictatorial manner - or - shift his politics toward Republicans. Overall, Trump was far more successful in the 2020 election than was Biden.
Occam's razor is a sharp instrument. Joe Biden won the Presidency with a wide margin during an election that decidedly favored Republicans? One of the simplest explanation for that outcome really is that the election was rigged.
Do you consider the fact that the House and Senate candidates are on the same ballot as the candidates for PotUS? What kind of magical rigging do you have in mind that creates a mixed party vote?
Consider how the ballots were configured. The Presidential race was the same on all ballots, everywhere. Senate races were only the same at the state level. House races were more granular, determined within districts. State and local races were also more granular by being constrained to smaller constituencies.
Rigging a Presidential election would be easiest since that race is he same on every ballot, everywhere. The two party candidates are guaranteed to be on every ballot. Rigging Senate races would be more difficult but certainly possible. But attempting to rig House races would be more complex. The complexity involved in attempting to rig state and local elections would be the greatest of all.
It's certainly possible to vote a party ticket on a ballot. But an unusual number of party only votes would become apparent in the election data. And many state and local races and initiatives are not by party. That too would become apparent in the election data and analysis of that data.
The evidence we have is that Joe Biden won the Presidency during an election that clearly favored Republicans overall. There has been a noted absence of post-election analysis for the 2020 election which doesn't follow the pattern of past elections. Following the 2016 election there was a lot of publisher's ink expended on analyzing and explaining the election because of the election's unusual outcome. Democrats are bickering among themselves and blaming each other for the 2020 election; that's how bad the election was for Democrats.
Something is out of whack. The uncharacteristic post-election handling of the election by political experts and political reporters has created a vacuum. And the simplest explanation to fill that vacuum is that the election was rigged because rigging the Presidential election would be easiest.
I do not see where you address the fact that the votes for a single voter are all on a single ballot. How do you rig an election to change only the vote for PotUS? You would have to rig the machines. Is that what you are thinking?
The simplest explanation is that R voters and independents voted for divided government: they did not want Trump but voted for Rs in the House and Senate to provide a partisan check on Biden. D voters, of course, more likely voted straight D.
And that is what happened: The majority of the people who Trump stirred to vote did so in repudiation of his conduct in office. They just don't like the man as a person. This is one of the reasons that Trump just cannot accept the results: They repudiate him, personally.
I know, so those disgruntled Republicans voted as they would have otherwise. This is the simplest explanation. There is no massive conspiratorial scheme needed. No one needs to figure out how they are going to somehow change a paper ballot or add voters to the canvassing sheet.
That can only be addressed by hand recounts that would remove automation from the process. Keep in mind that the original count of mail-in ballots was accomplished by election workers feeding the ballots into counting machines at a centralized location inaccessible to the public. And the mail-in ballots provided a clear and overwhelming advantage for one candidate.
Then evidence to support that simple explanation should be found in the election data. Yes, just accepting the election results would be simple. But that is not the only simple explanation for the election outcome. Explaining the election outcome with a rigged election is just as simple. And, as I have pointed out, the available evidence supports a simple explanation the election was rigged, too. Post-election analysis would clarify the explanation, wouldn't it?
Trump has challenged the integrity of the election. So far the integrity of the election has been defended by citing administrative policy, procedures, and protocols; the defense of election integrity has not utilized election data as evidence. And the 2020 election is noteworthy for drastic changes in administrative policy, procedures, and protocols using the pandemic as justification. The expansion of early voting and absentee voting does provide greater opportunity for manipulating the vote. Defenders of election integrity have uncharacteristically begun accepting statements by government officials as accurate and honest following drastic changes to administrative policy, procedures, and protocols.
The Trump challenge has cited irregularities found in the voting and has sought closer scrutiny and analysis of the votes. So far, the defense to that challenge has been that the number of irregularities are insufficient to alter the outcome of the election. The election data is known to contain irregularities but that information has not been quantified. We really don't know how widespread are irregularities in the votes cast. Those defending the election seem to be opposing closer scrutiny of the votes and election data.
As I understand it, you are a computer guru. I'm not so sure about the machines..........except for the counting machines. Could there not be something in the programs of said machines that could be altered if one knew what they were doing? Honest question.
It would be trivial for a software engineer to change the program so that random ballots will register a vote for Trump as a vote for Biden. The randomness can be calibrated to produce a certain percentage of change (e.g. 15% of votes for Trump wind up as votes for Biden).
But software products are not simply the programming. There are layers of quality assurance and testing that go into this. Plus, for voting machines, there is a rigorous certification required. Note that the very last thing a voting machine company wants is to have any issues with the integrity of the machines. So they have plenty of mechanisms to secure the integrity of the machines. These machines must be secure and correct or the company is out of business.
So, in short, technically if one has access to the code, such a change is easy. But gaining access to the code and causing that change to survive into public usage would be quite a feat.
Finally, there is no evidence that the voting machines operated improperly. That really should be the end of it right there.
So do you think that many (this would require quite a coordinated effort) actual election workers conspired to miscount paper ballots? They counted incorrectly for Trump votes but did not count incorrectly for the R Senate and House votes??
Deliver the evidence. Rigging an election requires a special initiative and that requires coordination and effort to overcome the extant checks and balances of the system. Show me the evidence that this took place at a level that would change the outcome of this election. No, Nerm, this is not just as simple as an election where the people rejected Trump but held for divided government.
No election (no complex process) will be perfect. But you speculate a level of errors / rigging that is sufficient to change the results of the election. Show me the evidence. Without it, this is truly nutty levels of bullshit.
The counting machines depend upon spatial registration to properly count the marked boxes. It's necessary to calibrate the machines so that the position of each vote box on the page corresponds with a candidate. Manipulating the calibration will alter the vote count. That sort of manipulation may or may not show up in the tabulated vote counts depending upon the type of machine.
The counting machines will also count ballots that are fed through the machine more than once. The counting machines will provide vote counts for the candidates and initiatives on the ballot but do not necessarily have the capacity to check for duplicate counts, depending upon the machine. Duplicate votes wouldn't be caught until tabulation by a central computer, assuming one is used. Not checking or disabling the check for duplicate counts would alter the vote totals.
There are several ways to manipulate the vote count without hacking the software.
That would require analysis of the election data - or - manually counting votes under close observation. A single election worker could alter 10,000 or more votes quite easily. Automation makes that possible. Only analysis of the election data or scrutiny of the ballots could detect that.
One election official with direct access to the internal workings of the system really can alter an election outcome by tens of thousands of votes. Only a handful of selected election officials in areas where there are more voters would be needed to change the outcome of a Presidential election. Especially since Presidential elections would be easiest to rig. A single election official could manipulate counting machines and vote tabulation which would be undetected without analysis of the election data and/or scrutiny of the ballots.
Rigging an election would not require a vast conspiracy. Only a handful of conspirators would be needed.
That would cause errors, not a shift from Trump to Biden.
That requires manual sorting of ballots and then malicious intent by a whole lot of people. And they need to do this without being detected. Further, this still does not explain low votes for Trump but high votes for R senators and House reps.
Without evidence, you are engaging in pure speculation. One can speculate anything. For example, why not speculate that God wanted Biden to win? Certainly God has all sorts of clever means to make that happen.
Show my the evidence Nerm.
One programmer could do that. But that requires getting through the checks and balances and surviving the post election analysis. Where have you seen evidence that this took place?
Nowhere?
Then why are you speculating?
Michigan secretary of state’s office also said it came down to a human error by the Antrim County clerk, not a failure in Dominion’s system.
"Because the clerk did not update software, even though the tabulators counted all the ballots correctly, those accurate results were not combined properly when the clerk reported unofficial results," the Nov. 6 statement said
Thoughts?
Not sure how true but I did read somewhere after the election, that a lot of votes for Biden had virtually no down ballot votes. Only PotUS.
I just don't know.
And the checks & balances caught this.
The question is your thoughts.
Do you think there was sufficient error and foul play to change the results of this presidential election? If so, I would like to see the evidence. If there is no evidence supporting such a change, then why (after all 50 states have certified their results) are people still talking about this?
Okay. Why does this bother you?
I do not know if there was sufficient error. I am just saying those who just blow it off as butt hurt Trump supporters are NOT going to care if there was or not. They won. They won't question anything to do with the election. They got their man.
Doesn't really bother me. I really don't care. Whomever sits in the Oval makes very little impact on my life as a whole. And unless he does something stupid that impacts me or mine directly in a negative way, I don't care that Biden won. I didn't care if Obama won either until I digested what it takes to "fundamentally change America". To fundamentally change something, one must first tear it down. And I, and many others on both sides in my circle, watched closely to make sure that didn't happen.
Where is this post-election analysis of which you speak?
We (because I am included in that group) do not just blow this off. We have been asking for evidence to back up the claim. How many times have you seen people ask for evidence??
Without suitable evidence, there is no reason to question the integrity of the results. Trump has worked his supporters up into a frenzy. It deeply disappoints me that so many fellow citizens actually believe what this narcissistic lying sack of shit claims.
Have you not observed the many recounts and verification processes taken by the states? Are you unaware of the lawsuits raised and the rebuttals to same?
Nerm, show me the evidence. Until you do so, your claims of a rigged election are without merit.
Well isn't that who is still refusing to accept the results of the election?
If the exact same election results were reversed with Trump winning by 7 million votes and by over 350,000 votes in the swing States and Democrats were trying desperately to overturn the results by any means even though they had no evidence of widespread voter fraud, wouldn't Trump supporters call them "butthurt Biden supporters" and not question the results because they got their man? Wouldn't they be calling Democrats whiny sore losers who are trying to destroy democracy and overturn an election? Wouldn't Trump supporters be calling such baseless attempts a coup or sedition if Biden had refused to concede? I think we all know the answer to those questions is a resounding "YES!". Just more evidence that conservative Republican hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Are you unaware that the seeded article concerns post-election analysis of Georgia's election data that raises questions about voting irregularities?
I have shown you evidence by seeding the article.
An article isn't evidence. It's just a story. More claims being made without anything concrete to support it.
Isn't that what happened following the 2016 election? Trump did not win the popular vote in 2016; Trump won the necessary electoral votes to win the election. Even if Trump successfully changes the electoral vote for 2020 he still would not have won the popular vote.
Democrats did try to overturn the 2016 election by any means. Hillary Clinton chose to avoid challenging the election results. But the Democratic Party really did pursue efforts to remove Trump from office and overturn the election by any means.
The country has suffered four years of protests, open hostility by the press, bureaucratic insubordination, and legal shenanigans just because Donald Trump won the 2016 election. I'd say Democrats were a little more than butt hurt.
And after all that, the 2020 election still favored Republicans. Something is definitely out of whack.
Nerm, claims of discrepancies, fraud, etc. are not evidence. Claims of evidence are not evidence.
Further, the evidence of which I speak is evidence that would change the results of the election.
Show me the evidence.
It has been more than a month since the election and we have yet to see evidence that would even get close to changing the results of this election in any state.
Instead we have claims from Trump supporters who seem to be shameless.
If there was fraud that would, for the first time in our history, change the results of a presidential election, then I absolutely want an investigation to find out how it happened so that we can prevent it in the future.
But this incessant stream of bullshit lawsuits and associated claims is sickening. I am appalled at the level of partisanship in this nation and how deeply it affects minds.
No. The country has suffered from four years of Trump and had enough. That is why they told him, in no uncertain terms, to get the fuck out. The open hostility was brought on himself by being hostile and calling vetted and trustworthy news sources "fake news" and insisting that his version of reality was right even though it was demonstrably false. Bureaucratic agencies designed by the congress to perform certain functions should not be assigned a mission that contraverts the very purpose of the agency, and that is what Trump is still trying to do. He is still poisoning the well out of sheer spite and vindictiveness because he can't handle the fact that the majority of the people think that "Sleepy Joe" Biden would be a better president than he.
It is not even that they necessarily think that Biden will be a good President, the majority of the voters probably would have voted for a dead fish rather than have four more years of the Trump Show. The man makes a mockery of what a President should be and how a President should behave, which is why he gets so much support from people who don't want to observe the protocols and niceties of conventional society. People don't want their Crazy Uncle Donald to represent them. They want someone who is not going to lie and cheat to try to steal an election that he (Trump) Did Not Win.
Some people can excuse his uncouth activities, his bald faced lies, his misogynistic temperament, his racism and many, many other faults because they like his policies. Well, right now he is showing himself to be a petulant, spoiled man-baby in front of the whole world all while dragging the stature of the United States of America down with him, dragging the democratic ideals on which this country was built through the mud for nothing but a personal failure on his part to man up and accept defeat. That is what he is doing. And everyone should be outraged at his audacity and firmly aligned against him pulling us further into the morass of Trumpism..
trumpsters in 2020 = LOSERS !
Do you believe that there is sufficient fraud and errors in our presidential election of 2020 to change the results of this election?
From Esquire
And, I don't recall anyone except Trump & company saying that the election in 2016 was rigged.
I was thinking the same thing. That how Trump always starts with elections, because of course, that (in his mind) is the only way he could lose. Nothing is ever his fault.
Plus, in 2020, dems aren't saying you can't cheat in elections, Trump and the RNC are trying that right now. What they do say is that there is NO EVIDENCE of any widespread cheating or fraud.
True. On the left we saw lots of irrefutable evidence that the Russians interfered in the election in favor of Trump, but no one was alleging the election was "rigged". It was proven that Russia wanted Trump to win and did spend $1.25 million a month on false ads and did in fact hack the Democrat Party email server and released embarrassing emails (though none showed any actual wrongdoing by Democrats) and illegally released them during the campaign.
So while there was lots of evidence of Russian interference and Trump campaign officials welcoming such interference, there was no evidence that the election itself was compromised. Hillary Clinton conceded November 9th even though the results were far closer in those battleground States than they were in the 2020 election. Hillary lost by 110,000 votes in three battleground States, Trump has lost by more than 350,000 votes in the battleground States yet he continues to whine, complain and lie and is cheered on by his feckless worthless moronic sycophant base of sore losers an unpatriotic scum.
I guess you missed Hillary's remarks for four years.
Post a link
Yes.
"A bipartisan Senate report released Tuesday affirms the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusions that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election in a far-ranging influence campaign approved by Russian President Vladimir Putin and aimed at helping Donald Trump win the White House."
US President-elect Donald Trump has asserted he won the popular vote on 8 November "if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally".
"The Senate Intelligence Committee assessed that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's "high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services" was a "grave counterintelligence threat". The foremost individual was Manafort's employee Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian. The committee identified Kilimnik as a "Russian intelligence officer"; describing that Manafort and Kilimnik had a "close and lasting relationship" even through the 2016 election. Manafort repeatedly tried to "secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik", including "sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy"
"A Russian troll factory had a $1.25 million monthly budget to interfere in the 2016 US election"
Of the more than 120 million votes cast in the 2016 election, 107,000 votes in three states effectively decided the election.
"Hillary Clinton congratulated Donald Trump on his win in the middle of the night after election day on Nov. 8, 2016. She formally conceded before noon on Nov. 9."
I realize that facts and reality won't matter to some, but perhaps someday when they withdraw their heads from their own asses they'll get a whiff of fresh air are realize it's better out here in the real world instead of being so fucking self absorbed they're feeding off their own fecal matter.
I'm pretty sure it's impossible to link posts from the conservative alternate universe. Perhaps the hell-mouth portal to their nether regions only allows heads to be inserted to download their fantasy bullshit but doesn't allow their alternative facts to be retrieved and shared with others without the data being immediately destroyed by actual facts.
Four years? I remember some whining from her specifically for maybe six months after the election but then she went quiet. I don't I've heard anything from her in approx 3.5 years
The 2016 Presidential Election WAS Rigged | League of Women Voters (lwv.org)
The election really was rigged - The Washington Post
Yes, the 2016 election was rigged – and we're getting closer to proving it - Palmer Report
Nearly Half Of Democrats Think The 2016 Election Was 'Rigged' (thefederalist.com)
Hillary Clinton BLAMES: Comey, Voter Fraud, Russians,... (youtube.com)
Wikileaks: Clinton Camp Feared 'Obama'-Style Voter Fraud ... (breitbart.com)
Hillary Clinton talks impeachment, election fraud at Q&A after UM lecture - Bing video
This election was rigged. And it needs to stop,” said Chris Carson - Not Hillary . Off to a bad start.
Said Dana Milbank, author of that opinion piece. Still not Hillary.
Said Bill Palmer, author of that opinion piece. Still not Hillary.
Said nobody specifically, according to the Federalist. Not Hillary, zero for 4.
Wow, you got a partial ONE, kind of, but not really ! She was speaking more of Russia than anything else, and a Republican lead Senate panel agrees with her. And she is responding to a specific question, it wasn't anything she brought up herself.
Senate panel backs assessment that Russia interfered in 2016
First you are going to have to prove " Obama-Style Voter Fraud", then you will have to prove Hillary said anything about it. So you are back to another fail .
Seriously? Same YouTube video that you linked above.
In conclusion, your examples of "Hillary's remarks for years" is exactly once and only after she was specifically asked about it.
I was also responding to the above post. But kudos for actually looking at the links.
Hillary bitched for years about the election being stolen from her including by voter fraud amoung the hundred other reasons she blamed for her loss. If you want to stomp your feet and hold your breath over semantics, knock yourself out.
You didn't prove that. Ozz proved the exact opposite
Her hall of blame.............................
Hillary Clinton blame list - FORTY-ONE and counting | Daily Mail Online
So it's all in one book...not her going on endless talk shows for the last 4 years with the whiskey tango foxtrot look on her face.
Got it
your link sucks. It's full of ads and stopping my computer from fully loading the article
Still no Hillary saying the election was rigged, especially by the Republicans. but some people obviously did, besides Trump. I stand corrected on my initial observation.However, claim did not come from the Democratic party or it's candidate and was not organized into such a fever pitch.
And, why are we discussing Hillary anyways? She wasn't in this election.
She did a lot of whining, tho. But she got all that angst out in her book and then pretty much left the stage
I looked at them, but you didn't???
If you're giving me kudos for looking at them, I am taking away kudos from you for posting links WITHOUT looking at them first.
I understand what DP is saying.
There was Russian interference in the 2016 elections (hacking of emails, disinformation campaigns on social media), but nobody from the Democratic Party or Hillary Clinton claimed the election was rigged. Donald Trump did, tho, because he couldn't accept that he loss the popular vote.
Words are powerful things and have very specific meanings.
Rigged: adjective - manipulated or controlled by deceptive or dishonest means
Interfere: verb - to enter into or take a part in the concerns of others
There is a big difference between those two words which mean vastly different things. Yes, it's been proven that the Russian government at the behest of Putin surreptitiously interfered in the 2016 election. That is what Democrats claimed and have been proven correct by a Republican Senate investigation.
"The Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that Russian president Vladimir Putin had ordered the 2016 Democratic National Committee cyber attacks and the subsequent leaks of stolen material damaging to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign "
"The committee described that Trump's presidential campaign "sought to maximize the impact of those leaks to aid Trump’s electoral prospects". The Trump campaign "created messaging strategies to promote and share" the material, and "encouraged further leaks". The Trump campaign tasked Trump associate Roger Stone to gather information about WikiLeaks' release of the material; Stone reported to Trump or senior campaign members ."
"The Senate Intelligence Committee assessed that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort's "high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services " was a "grave counterintelligence threat ". The foremost individual was Manafort's employee Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian. The committee identified Kilimnik as a "Russian intelligence officer"; describing that Manafort and Kilimnik had a "close and lasting relationship" even through the 2016 election. Manafort repeatedly tried to "secretly share internal Campaign information with Kilimnik", including "sensitive internal polling data or Campaign strategy".
That is absolutely interference, but it is not "rigging" an election thus Democrats never claimed the election was rigged, only Trump did that by claiming "millions of illegals voted" to explain his 3 million deficit in the popular vote count.
They didn't hack Hillary's emails, they hacked the Democrat Party email server and released those emails to WikiLeaks. As for proof, perhaps you should try reading the Senate Intelligence findings I linked. Refusing to accept the facts that are staring you in the face is just stupid.
On October 30, 2017, Manafort was arrested by the FBI after being indicted by a federal grand jury as part of Robert Mueller's investigation into the Trump campaign. The indictment against Manafort and Rick Gates charged them with engaging in a conspiracy against the United States, engaging in a conspiracy to launder money, failing to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts, acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign principal, making false and misleading statements in documents filed and submitted under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), and making false statements.
I really can't imagine why anyone would be dumb enough to try and defend that piece of shit or claim he didn't do anything wrong. The facts show he was selling internal Campaign information and sensitive internal polling data to a Russian intelligence officer. This fact is not in dispute, it was proven by the Senate intelligence Committee.
You can lead the ignorant to knowledge but you can't make them think.
i'll DRINK to that, but Hell, i drink to about N E thing, as, its the RULE
What does your silly meme have to do with the seed?
And there is a reason for this. Tens of thousands of Republicans voted for their local Republican congressmen while rejecting Trump and Trumpism.
The reality is, you can't have it both ways. You can't claim a "red ripple" with Democrats losing a few seats while claiming election fraud on the Presidential level, they're the same ballots.
Those who continue to cling to the delusion that the election was somehow "rigged" are simply self centered, mentally deficient sore losers. Sadly, asking such persons to "get over it" is like asking a petulant 6 year old in the middle of a sugar rush to hand you their third piece of birthday cake they're protecting with their body like it was the "One Ring". "No!! My precious President!! He couldn't have lost!! It must have been rigged!!"...
Donald Spiegull able
It really is quite simple to explain and does not mean anything like the article states. Trump stirred people to vote. More of those people who voted did so to get rid of him because they do not like his method. So he lost. The down ballot candidates do not (at least hopefully) represent his extreme, slash and burn mentality of politics and therefore attracted more people and got voted for in greater numbers.
Hmmm, I thought that Georgia purged their voter roles in 2018? I wonder if they quantify and qualify that assertion in their suit?
This is known as identity theft, which you indicated in your comment to be a problem. I believe that it is a problem, but seperate from the electoral process in terms of statistical significance.
If he indeed has identified, as in can specifically trace the person who voted to the ballot that they cast, he is welcome to show this to everyone. Personally, I find this assertion to be highly suspicious, if not only because it comes out of a discredited organization in the guise of the GA GOP.
Also my opinion is that the GOP had better start distancing itself from these specious lawsuits. The election is over, the results certified by the states. If they continue on this Trump fantasy bandwagon, they are going to keep people from believing anything that anyone says. While that may be good for them at the present moment, it cannot last and the cult of personality that has been dragging them along will either explode into violence or implode into into backbiting and infighting. At least that is the way that I see things from where I am sitting.
Yes, a large number of organizations and individuals were motivated to remove Trump from office. Were those organizations and individuals sufficiently motivated to exploit flaws and weaknesses in the administration of elections?
Shouldn't we be concerned that the least secure method of voting provided one candidate a clear and overwhelming advantage?
IMO it's larger than identity theft. We already know that multi-national businesses are exploiting identity data for profit. Targeted information has become normal. Information gleaned from commercial and social activities influence the flow of information across all platforms. Activity on social media influences the type of paper mail that is distributed. Data analytics directs news reporting, governing policies, scientific inquires, and professional advice.
The use of data mining to influence elections is only a small step in today's normal. The administration of elections hasn't taken the basic steps to deter exploitation of identity information. In fact, access to voter information has been allowed to encourage exploitation for political purposes.
Data analysis in itself is not evidence of anything. It may direct someone where to examine to find evidence. In the case of this election - votes were counted, audited and recounted. No evidence to over turn the election was found. How many lawsuit ruling will it take for it to sink in?
Analysis of data really is evidence. The scientific community relies upon data analysis as evidence. The data is the physical evidence and the analysis explains what the physical evidence means. The explanations (or conclusions) drawn from data becomes evidence, too.
The argument that data analysis is not evidence completely invalidates the need for mask mandates and Phase III trials of coronavirus vaccines.
So you are telling state and federal judges that they don't know the law?
The article is about an election lawsuit not scientific data.
I do not see how the Democrats' side would be more able to game the system than the GOP. Indeed, it would seem that, given the political makeup of GA in general, the GOP would have a better chance of doing this than the Democrats or some unknown entity. What is more, Trump has shown throughout his entire lifetime the propensity to loudly accuse whomever he is in a kerfuffle with of doing the exact same thing that he is doing and wants people to scrutinize the other entity instead of looking at what he is doing.
Or, if your concern is that the mail-in ballots were more for Biden, the skew makes sense because the mail in ballots came from people who were more Democrat and more in tune with the pandemic, thus more inclined to vote for Biden. It really is that simple. So simple Trump could even foresee it and, just like Trump does, he "predicted" what was going to happen. Then he carried through with his day after election, "Look! See what Happened ! Just like I said! The biggest fraud in history!" The election happened just like it should have: Correctly.
Simply: No.
The President has shown that he is willing to exploit any flaws or weaknesses in the administration of elections up to and beyond making shit up and filing a lawsuit about it.
I would really love to see evidence of this.
Yes, it would seem quite plausible either party (or both) could exploit the same flaws and weaknesses in the administration of elections. So could multi-national businesses. So could foreign governments.
And you know this how? Data? Evidence? Or conjecture?
Data. Specific to your seed, the GA ballots were counted , thrice. When the mail in ballots were opened there were observers there from both parties to challenge. The canvassing rolls go along with the ballots cast. If there were any discrepancies such as machine counting increases or decreases, they would have been picked up with the hand count.
As with so much of the Trump claims before and during his troubled presidency, there is no "there" there. It is just made up bullshit from a man who knows that some people would believe him if he said he shit out gold bricks.
Yep, we Democrats cheated. We just forgot to cheat on the down ballot. Weird, huh?
Absolutely... Wait, how does that work... ummmm So if the votes were increased for Biden and not for the other candidates... Aww crap, that won't work... It has to be here somewhere, mine-furor (intentionally misspelled) said so.
We could always do a séance ask Chavez how it was done
I tried that once and ended up with Hugo von Hofmannsthal.
Yeah, I think that's the biggest, most obvious hole in the conspiracy theory.
Republicans should actually take some solace in this because it would appear that the American people were repudiating Trump the individual, and not so much Republican policies in general.
I would agree they were repudiating Trump.
It would be interesting to see what the breakdown of people who voted were registered GOP vs the ratio of Trump to Biden votes.
Even if they can identify something concrete, it might not necessarily make a difference. For example this:
Assuming they didn't vote twice, this is not really a problem. Their votes would still be tabulated as part of the state total, which wouldn't change just because they voted in a different county.
Unless we are talking about a county election.
Right, but those apparently all turned out just fine.
There is probably life on Mars, trump is probably mentally retarded...
Probably doesn't = facts.
Source