A spokesman for Clark County noted that early voting records already have to be preserved under state law and said that no polling precincts were improperly kept open. At a hearing Tuesday morning, a skeptical judge questioned the Trump campaign’s attorney and denied the request to preserve evidence in the case.
From Jonathan Simon:
Every nail on head.
Predictably no rising or falling star, no celeb, no funnyman or funnywoman, and God knows no luminary pundit is going to risk mussing their TV makeup by raising an eyebrow, getting a scratchy throat by clearing it, or possibly breaking a nail by hitting their keyboard with (as Yeats would put it) “a passionate intensity.”
Nope, this one is left to us (unpaid election integrity advocates who wear no makeup, have bitten our nails to the quick, and have cleared our throats so often that we have built up protective callouses)—and, yes, to the people.
We’re going to have to act swiftly and decisively, before the consolidation and purging, before such dissidents as we are reclassified as “terrorists.” And it’s going to have to have major economic impact—as in tax revolt, general strikes, mass consumer boycotts—in order to change anything, prospective or retrospective.
It’s come suddenly (though it was, at least in part, predictable, and predicted) to a head.
If we don’t recognize how much of a crisis this is, and respond with bravery, resolve, and organization, we’re done for, believe me.
On “Morning Joe” today, Mike made a righteous case against the liberal media for its disastrous arrogance toward all those suffering workers, or ex-workers, who came out to vote for Trump in Michigan, Wisconsin and elsewhere.
As moving and perceptive as he was on that key point, however, toward the end he suddenly revealed his own deep cluelessness about ANOTHER crucial aspect of the trouble we’re all in today: the absolute corruption of our voting system.
Having made a cogent case for why so many folks in Michigan came out to vote for Trump, Mike then completely contradicted it—and, in so doing, grossly misinterpreted a stark electoral anomaly in Michigan—by pointing out that 90,000 Michiganders had cast NO vote for president, while completing every OTHER entry on their ballots.
His point was that those 90,000 people had deliberately refused to vote for Hillary OR Trump: something that he simply couldn’t know;
and a patronizing claim in its own way, since he was so confidently speaking FOR those voters—who may well have TRIED to vote for president, but whose votes were “counted” otherwise, by those who’d programmed the machines.
It’s happened before—in 2000, for example, when Al Gore (seemingly) “lost” Florida in part because a lot of voters in THAT state had had THEIR ballots edited by unseen hands: “There were about 27,000 of these ‘undervotes’ in three South Florida counties, ballots on which no vote for president was registered by machines the first time around,” as CBS News reported at the time.
Back then, “experts” explained that weird anomalty away by “speculating” that “more Democratic voters would be inexperienced or advanced in age” (a claim based on no evidence—and a laughable self-contradiction). And in the face of THIS anomaly—an “undervote” three times the size of that one 16 years ago—Mike came up with yet another blinding “explanation.”
How likely was it, really, that 90,000 Michiganders would have gone to all that trouble, going out to vote, but NOT for president, just to make the point (i.e., Mike’s point) that they weren’t happy with their choices? And just how likely was it in a state where, as Mike noted, TRUMP had so much strong support among the state’s white voters? Did 90,000 NON-white workers, and ex-workers, in that state all cast those undervotes to mount that protest—or were their ballots changed without their knowing it?
That likelihood is clearly INCONCEIVABLE to Michael Moore, as it was also INCONCEIVBLE to all the other media celebrities assembled there with him in “Morning Joe”—and as it’s clearly INCONCEIVABLE to all the other lefty stars who worked so hard to get us all to vote for Hillary, but who have all gone AWOL in the face of ever-mounting evidence that Trump “won” this election just as Hillary “won” her party’s nomination: through rampant vote suppression and computerized election fraud.
With millions disenfranchised, coast to coast, through purges of the electronic voter rolls, and voter caging, and voter ID requirements, and partisan interference by election officials, and the deliberate placement of too few machines in certain precincts, and volleys of disinformation on the times and places to go vote—and as the exit polls suggest widespread manipulation of the vote-counts throughout the swing states—why are we NOT hearing anything at all about it from Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis, Gloria Steinem, Robert Reich, John Nichols or Paul Krugman, or Bruce Springsteen, Katy Perry, George Clooney, Beyonce, JZ, Sarah Silverman, Bill Maher, John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, RuPaul, Lin-Manuel Miranda, Madonna, and the cast of “West Wing,” or Media Matters, the Center for American Progress, Mother Jones, Slate, Salon, DailyKos, RawStory, The Progressive, AlterNet, or any of the other leftist stars and outlets and non-profits that cast Hillary as our ONLY choice (while also staying mum about the vast election theft whereby she seized the nomination).
And if they’re silent now, with Donald Trump ascending to the throne BECAUSE of the corruption of our voting system, will they stay silent as we all approach the next election (if any)? Or will they now finally face the fact that the United States is not a real electoral democracy, and help us fight to make it one at last?
Michael Moore’s on “Morning Joe” is at MSNBC 11-11-2016 07.42.43
Exit Polls from November 8 Election Show Patterns Indicating Possible Electronic Election Rigging in Favor of Republicans
By Jonathan Simon
Presidential Race and Senate Races Show Suspicious Pattern
All over the world, exit polls are considered to be the gold standard in detecting the presence of election rigging. When the votecounts and the exit poll results are very different, it’s an indication that the vote counts may be wrong. It’s not proof of election fraud, but it does mean the election should be investigated.
A discrepancy between votecounts and exit poll results is exactly what we’re seeing in the November 8 election. You can see the comparison at the links below.
In the images at the links, the right hand column lists the percentage of shift from Clinton to Trump in the Presidential race, and from Democrat to Republican in Senate races. We call a shift towards Republicans a “red shift,” and a shift toward Democratic candidates a “blue shift.” We are seeing no blue shifts in this election.
Outcome-reversing shifts are highlighted in red.
This is a familiar pattern, indicative of electronic rigging, but in this case even more dramatic than usual. With all that has been said and written about the vulnerability of the computers that count our votes in secret, one must ask why these votes and states shifted? And why the outcome-changing results are simply accepted as accurate and honest.
There is every reason to investigate and then recount key states by hand where possible. This is too often not possible, because some of these results come from paperless, touchscreen computers.
And even where possible, with optical scanners, it is just not done.
Is it a patriotic service to our country — and the world — to passively and quietly accept the results from this election without review or inquiry? Let’s take responsibility and investigate where the evidence gathered places the validity of these results in doubt.
Where did this data come from?
The exit poll numbers are transcribed from screen captures of time-stamped CNN exit polls. Immediately after the polls close on election night, these figures were posted at the CNN website and other media websites.
The votecounts in most of the states in these tables are near 100% reporting, though some will have to be updated as remaining votes are tabulated. The red shift numbers may therefore change slightly by the time the final counts are available, but the general pattern is well established.
After the initial posting, exit poll totals are adjusted to match the votecounts. If you visit the CNN website now, it is the adjusted exit poll numbers you’ll see displayed there.
The role of exit polls in fair elections is discussed in depth in my book, Code Red: Electronic Election Theft and the New American Century. View on Amazon
I call on County Election Directors, Secretaries of State, the United States Congress, and President Obama to initiate an investigation into the outcome of the 2016 election.
Top 10 Election Problems
By David Swanson
We got 1,001 things wrong in the latest U.S. election. Here are the top 10:
- Expecting an election to solve deep injustices that require a massive movement, as have all the deep injustices of the past. This can be fixed through education and activism.
- Rigging the DNC primary to deny Bernie Sanders a nomination. This could have been fixed by Sanders running as an independent. It can now be fixed by all DNC donors abandoning it and putting their funds into activism. Of course the DNC should dump Brazile and all Clintonites, but installing Howard Dean or Keith Ellison hardly solves anything. Disempowering parties through some of the proposals below would work.
- Rigging the RNC primary by giving Donald Trump endless free media coverage. This can be fixed by busting up the media cartel, requiring free and equal air time for candidates, limiting the election season, banning legalized bribery, and publicly funding elections. (These things also disempower parties.)
- Voter suppression that Greg Palast says stripped 1.1 million voters from the rolls in swing states, but which Democrats seem not to give a damn about — perhaps because Putin didn’t do it. This can be fixed by creating a right to vote, making voter registration automatic, debunking the myth of “voter fraud,” undoing the anti-voter restrictions of recent years, providing adequate polling stations, and making election day a holiday.
- Unverifiable election machines, including optical scanners, that have left us in an awkward situation. Exit polls, which the U.S. Department of State uses to judge the credibility of elections in other countries, show that Clinton won in North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Florida, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin. But we are supposed to just take it on blind faith that in fact she didn’t. This can be fixed by publicly hand counting paper ballots in every polling place. Of course the acceptable position is to believe on faith that the vote counts are accurate, but since when is taking it on faith the progressive position, when taking it on empirical evidence is a perfectly possible alternative?
- The winner-take-all system in most states, which concentrates the election on a handful of states and leads to the winner of the popular vote losing the election. This can be fixed by states choosing to distribute their electoral college “votes” in proportion to their actual human votes.
- The gerrymandered districts that make it virtually impossible to unelect rotten incumbents. This can be fixed through non-partisan redistricting.
- The winner-take-all system in each election that fuels lesser evilism. This can be fixed through ranked choice voting, as just done in Maine and in Benton County, Oregon.
- The Presidential Debate Commission which limits debates to moderators and participants who — even when they are fed the questions beforehand — are an utter embarrassment to the human species. This can be fixed by allowing the League of Women Voters or any independent organization to host the debates.
- The United States Senate, which gives the 40 million people of California no greater representation than the 0.6 million people of Wyoming. This can be fixed by abolishing the United States Senate.
US election blighted by computer glitches and long lines
by Mark Berman, William Wan and Sari Horowitz
As voters flooded polling places across the country on Election Day, some reported problems such as broken machines, long lines and voter intimidation in states ranging from Texas to Pennsylvania.
While voting appeared to proceed without headaches in many locations, election observers said they expect a significant increase in the number of issues reported nationwide. In particular, voters in jurisdictions across the country encountered problems with malfunctioning voting machines, highlighting issues with the aging infrastructure expected to support tens of millions of voters turning out on Election Day.
The first high-profile legal action of the day saw Donald Trump’s campaign headed to court for a hearing in Nevada after filing a lawsuit arguing that polls were improperly kept open late during early voting in Clark County.
According to the lawsuit filed by the Republican nominee, this was done “to help Hillary Clinton,” Trump’s Democratic opponent. Trump’s campaign asked for the voting machines and ballots involved “be set aside, sequestered and impounded” to preserve the status quo “in the event of post-election challenges.”
This lawsuit follows a raft of recent legal wrangling in the days leading up to the election. As the bitter presidential campaign rumbled toward its conclusion, officials across the country have been bracing for the possibility of confusion and chaos on Election Day, owing to a flurry of new voting restrictions and Trump’s calls for his supporters to closely monitor polling places.
Voters in Florida, a key battleground, reported multiple accounts of voters saying they have encountered aggressive, intimidating behavior, according to a nonpartisan group monitoring election issues nationwide.
“In Florida we continue to receive a substantial amount of complaints about voter intimidation,” said Kristen Clarke, president of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which is running an independent effort to field voter complaints and questions.
Clarke said her group received reports from Miami-Dade County of “yelling, people using megaphones aggressively.” In Jacksonville, in the northeast corner of the state, Clarke said, “an unauthorized individual was found inside (a) polling place.”
This person was at St. Paul’s Methodist Church, a polling precinct in what Clarke described as a part of Jacksonville with predominantly black residents.
“He was asked to leave and refused,” she said. “Through our intervention and calls, that individual has been removed. Unauthorized individuals have no place in the polls.”
During early voting, Clarke’s group also received reports from Hollywood, Florida, about “aggressive individuals hovering around individuals as they approach the polling site,” she said during a briefing with reporters. “Some have turned away because they did not feel able to freely cast (a) ballot.”
Clarke said her group has received reports from about 80,000 voters since the beginning of early voting and expects that figure to reach 175,000 reports by the time the polls close. In 2012, the group received 90,000 calls total on Election Day.
On Tuesday afternoon, Colorado officials reported what could have been one of the biggest disruptions of the day. A spokeswoman for the Secretary of State’s office said that voter registration system was down in parts of the state, which meant that clerks could not process mail ballots and also meant that in-person votes would be viewed as provisional. The issue was resolved shortly before 3:30 p.m. Denver time.
During a telephone interview Tuesday on Fox News, Trump did not say whether he was expecting to argue with the outcome of the election, but he said he believed there were reports of voter fraud happening across the country.
“It’s happening at various places today, it’s been reported,” he said. “The machines, you put down a Republican and it registers as a Democrat, and they’ve had a lot of complaints about that today.”
It was not immediately clear what accounts Trump was referring to when he mentioned “a lot of complaints” about the issue. A report out of Clinton Township, an area near Pittsburgh, quoted some voters saying their tickets were switching from Trump to Clinton. According to that report, officials there said the machines were fixed and the problem resolved.
There have been other issues with machines, including some cases of them showing incorrect votes, though it was unclear how widespread this was.
Wendy Weiser, director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, said that they are seeing more problems with voting machines than they have seen in past election years.
“There are more machine breakdowns and more malfunctions all over the place,” Weiser said. “It’s really widespread.”
These breakdowns are not a surprise, Weiser said, because 42 states are using machines that are 10 or more years old. There have been issues with machines in South Carolina, New York, Missouri, Georgia, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Illinois and Indiana.
Team Trump is already filled with Washington insiders
By Tal Kopan
Washington (CNN)To shape his administration, President-elect Donald Trump is drawing squarely from the “swamp” he has pledged to drain.
Insiders seek to sway Trump’s policy direction
2016 Presidential Election Table
Posted on November 10, 2016 by Theodore de Macedo Soares
According to the exit polls conducted by Edison Research, Clinton won four key battleground states (NC, PA, WI, and FL) in the 2016 Presidential Election that she went on to lose in the computerized vote counts. With these states Clinton wins the Electoral College with a count of 302 versus 205 for Trump. Clinton also won the national exit poll by 3.2% and holds a narrow lead in the national vote count still in progress.
Exit polls were conducted in 28 states. In 23 states the discrepancies between the exit polls and the vote count favored Trump. In 13 of these states the discrepancies favoring Trump exceeded the margin of error of the state.
Clinton’s wins in the exit polls of four key battleground states are highlighted in blue. Trump’s wins in the computer vote counts in these same states are highlighted in red.
 Exit polls (EP) conducted by Edison Research and published by CNN shortly after the closing of state polls and downloaded by TdMS. Edison Research conducted one national EP and EPs in 28 states. As these first published exit polls are altered/adjusted to conform to the unverified computer vote counts, the discrepancies shown above are adjusted to near zero in the final EPs.
 New York Times reported vote count. Most states with 99%-100% completed vote counts. Washington at 72% and Utah at 78% are the exceptions. Last updated on November 10, 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/
 The margin columns subtracts the Clinton totals from Trump’s. A Trump win is shown by a positive sign and a Clinton win by a negative sign.
 Note that the Margin of Error (MOE) is for the differences between the two candidates (at 95% CI). This MOE is about double the usual MOE for each candidate. MOE calculated with multinomial formula discussed in sections 2 and 4 in: Franklin, C. The ‘Margin of Error’ for Differences in Polls. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin. October 2002, revised February 2007. Available at: https://abcnews.go.com/im
Here are the unadjusted exit polls for the 2016 election, as compiled by Jonathan Simon author of the indispensable CODE RED: Computerized Election Theft and The New American Century ).
These figures make quite clear that this election may have been “rigged” after all, just as Donald Trump kept warning except that it was rigged to make him president, and to maintain the GOP’s grip on the Senate.
Thus Donald Trump, and the Republicans, arguably “won” this election just as Hillary Clinton, and the DNC, “won” her the Democratic nomination—i.e., by fraudulently “beating” Bernie Sanders in the primaries. (For the evidence of all those thefts, see “Democracy Lost,” from Election Justice USA: http://www.election-justice-usa.org.)
And so what’s needed now is not more windy speculation as to why Trump “won” and Clinton “lost,” or any further guessing as to what might happen next because of those ostensible results, or any more indignant assignation of the blame for them.
Since those results were quite possibly rigged, what we need now is (1) a thorough investigation of all this year’s stolen races, and (2) a broad-based movement to get rid of our abysmal voting system, and replace it with one worthy of an actual democracy.
Link to Exit Polls:
“While We Were Sleeping”
Orwell Rolls In His Grave, featuring MCM – Buy the DVD
About News From Underground
News From Underground is a daily e-news service run by Mark Crispin Miller, a Professor of Culture and Communication at NYU. It is based on his belief that academics, like reporters, have a civic obligation to help keep the people well-informed, so that American democracy might finally work.
If you'd like to receive updates delivered to your inbox daily, sign up for News From Underground Alerts:
Help News From Underground!
Message from Mark: "I am a one-man operation, although assisted greatly by some volunteers, and, now and then, by people paid by others for one-time projects. There is no shortage of skilled, dedicated folks out there who want to help me. There is, however, nothing I can pay them with, unless you decide you can contribute something."
Please donate via the PayPal button above or via PayPal by email to: firstname.lastname@example.org
- MCM on “fake news,” and those recounts (RT interview)
- As Secretary of State, Rudy Giuliani could be even more corrupt than Hillary Clinton
- US government blames Russia for suspicions that the Russians may have hacked the vote for Trump
- “Fingerprints of theft in the election”: EXCELLENT interview w/ Jonathan Simon!
- Still struggling to pooh-pooh “conspiracy theory” of election theft, NYTimes blacks out Jill Stein’s amazing drive for funds
- Why isn’t Hillary contesting Trump’s weird “win”? (Is it because she stole “her” nomination?) on
- Why isn’t Hillary contesting Trump’s weird “win”? (Is it because she stole “her” nomination?) on
- Why isn’t Hillary contesting Trump’s weird “win”? (Is it because she stole “her” nomination?) on
- Rutgers prof sends political tweet, and NYPD takes him in for psych evaluation on
- Election theft in Michigan and Florida may have been more dramatic than we think… on
- The strange death of Nancy Schaefer (two items)
- "Fingerprints of theft in the election": EXCELLENT interview w/ Jonathan Simon!
- Why isn't Hillary contesting Trump's weird "win"? (Is it because she stole "her" nomination?)
- Update on the strange death of Nancy Schaefer
- Forbidden Bookshelf
- Democratic Undergroud
- t r u t h o u t
- The Ostroy Report
- Words of Power
- Veterans for Common Sense
- Writers Voice
- The Rude Pudit
- Talking Points Memo
- Mainstream Baptist
- The Existentialist Cowboy
- Election Defense Alliance
- Early America
- Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting
- Suburban Guerrilla
- Media Channel
- Cody Lyon
- Media Matters
- William Betz
- Online Journal
Need a bigger font size?
- Your link could be here too, contact us for pricing details.