Jump to content
  • Sign Up
Sign Up To Remove Ads! | Purchase An Ad Slot!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies. Want this topic removed from the archive?

Cinnamon

They just don't stop/Scientists Find "Persuasive Evidence" Of Vote Hacking, Demand Clinton Recount In 3 States

Recommended Posts

Between the so-called 'Hursti Hack', questions over Soros-linked voting machines, some peculiarities in Texas, and the media furore over Trump's democracy-threatening questioning of the election outcome; it is perhaps ironic that, after being soundly beaten across the vast majority of counties in America, NY Mag reports, a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers are urging the Clinton campaign to call for a recount in three swing states won by Donald Trump after allegedly finding "persuasive evidence" of vote hacking.

The group, which includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked.

New York Magazine reports that sources confirmed that the activists held a conference call last Thursday with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign general counsel Marc Elias to make their case...

<snip>

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-22/scientists-find-persuasive-evidence-vote-hacking-demand-clinton-recount-3-states

Trying to turn it into Russian hackers again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BornUntamed

The tactic for all of her campaign was to accuse donald trump what she herself was guilty of.  Dealings with russia, being for the iraq war, rape (bill & hill), lawsuit with underage girl, fraud in business, taxes, charity, temperament, fact checking, racism... ....the list is very long.  And now they seem to be doing the same thing with voter fraud. 

on a side note, who actually owns zerohedge.  I havent liked a lot of what they say lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 mil was a number based on Dead and non-registered voters was a number I heard.  I think they should be careful of opening that can of worms because it seems as if most dead voters went democratic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BornUntamed

3 million was all they had definitive proof of.  they know there are lots more but their registry cant prove the rest.  I believe this was just illegals.  I havent heard a dead voter count yet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, BornUntamed said:

The tactic for all of her campaign was to accuse donald trump what she herself was guilty of.  Dealings with russia, being for the iraq war, rape (bill & hill), lawsuit with underage girl, fraud in business, taxes, charity, temperament, fact checking, racism... ....the list is very long.  And now they seem to be doing the same thing with voter fraud. 

on a side note, who actually owns zerohedge.  I havent liked a lot of what they say lately.

I've been a ZeroHedge reader since it's inception in about 2009 and I've been very unhappy with the obvious changes in editorial choices over the past few months myself.  ZeroHedge was started by Daniel Ivandjiiski, whom I suspect was intelligent enough to beat some of the criminals at their own trading games, and copped an insider trading conviction as a result.  I don't know that to be true, but that was my best bet based on the limited evidence I could get my hands on.  He may have just been another corrupt wall streeter that got caught...but I doubt it.  Either way ZeroHedge took off under his tutelage due to his incredible knowledge of trading and Wall Street in general.  He was always a bit over the top and you had to take that into account, but IMO he built a very, very helpful information source.  He was an insider with a pretty big chip on his shoulder.  Whether that chip was the result of hating corruption he relentlessly exposed, or just anger at being legally forbidden to chase more of the spoils is not something I am too sure of.

Lately I don't see the same level of intellect or integrity in much that goes on there.  I don't know if he's even involved any longer....you can't prove it by the quality of the articles any more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×