<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><h1 class="txttitle" style="font-size: 30px; "><font class="Apple-style-span" size="3" style="font-size: 18px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;"><br></span></font><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; ">Occupiers,</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; "><br></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; ">Please read this link and take action, write to the Attorney General Eric Holder and Demand Hand</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; "> </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; "><br></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; ">Counts of the vote and delay broadcasting election results until hand counts of every precinct is done.</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; "><br></span></h1><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal; font-size: 18px; ">Agnes</span></div><h1 class="txttitle"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 17px; ">Write to Eric Holder here: <a href="mailto:askdoj@usdoj.gov">askdoj@usdoj.gov</a></span></h1><h1 class="txttitle">Retired NSA Analyst Proves GOP Is Stealing Elections Part I</h1><p class="txtauthor">By Denis Campbell, LA Progressive</p><p class="date">28 October 12</p><div> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p><img src="http://rsnorg.org/images/stories/alphabet/rsn-W.jpg" border="0">hy
is Mitt Romney so confident? In states where the winner will be decided
by less than 10%, of the vote he already knows he will win. This is no
tinfoil hat conspiracy. It's a math problem. And mathematics showed
changes in actual raw voting data that had no statistical correlation
other than programmable computer fraud. This computer fraud resulted in
votes being flipped from Democrat to Republican in every federal,
senatorial, congressional and gubernatorial election since 2008 (thus
far) and in the 2012 primary contests from other Republicans to Mitt
Romney.</p><p class="indent">This goes well beyond Romney's investment control in
voting machine maker Hart Intercivic and Diebold's close ties to George
W. Bush. Indeed all five voting machine companies have very strong GOP
fundraising ties, yet executives (including the candidate's son Tagg
Romney) there is no conflict between massively supporting one party
financially whilst controlling the machines that record and count the
votes.</p><p class="indent">A retired NSA analyst has spent several sleepless
nights applying a simple formula to past election results across
Arizona. His results showed across-the-board systemic election fraud on a
coordinated and massive scale. But the analysis indicated that this
only happens in larger precincts because anomalies in small precincts
can be more easily detected.</p><p class="indent"><strong>"Easy to Cheat"</strong></p><p class="indent">Retired NSA analyst Michael Duniho has worked for
nearly seven years trying to understand voting anomalies in his home
state of Arizona and Pima County. This publication has written
extensively about apparent vote machine manipulation in a <a href="http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/it%E2%80%99s-the-ballot-count-stupid/article1265.html" target="_blank">2006 RTA Bond issue election</a>
that is still being fought in the courts. Said Duniho, "It is really
easy to cheat using computers to count votes, because you can't see what
is going on in the machine."</p><p class="indent">When Duniho <a href="http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-Republican-Presidential-Primary.xlsx" target="_blank">applied a mathematical model to actual voting results in the largest voting precincts</a>,
he saw that only the large precincts suddenly trended towards Mitt
Romney in the Arizona primary – and indeed all Republicans in every
election since 2008 – by a factor of 8%-10%. The Republican candidate in
every race saw an 8-10%. gain in his totals whilst the Democrat lost
8-10%. This is a swing of up to 20 point, enough to win an election
unless a candidate was losing very badly.</p><p class="indent">Since sifting through and decoding massive amounts of
data was his work for decades on behalf of the National Security Agency,
he wanted to understand why this was ONLY happening in large precincts.</p><p class="indent"><strong>Nose Counting</strong></p><p class="indent">The idea of examining large precinct results came via a link to a report written by <a href="http://www.themoneyparty.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Republican-Primary-Election-Results-Amazing-Statistical-Anomalies_V2.0.pdf" target="_blank">Francois Choquette and James Johnson</a>.
Choquette became curious about South Carolina primary results in the
February Republican contest. There a poll observer noted an unusually
big gain of votes for Mitt Romney in larger precincts than in smaller
ones. Choquette wanted to know why?</p><p class="indent">He examined and applied all of the normal statistical
markers to see where a variance might occur: income level, population
density, race, urban vs. rural, even party registration numbers. He
found no correlation to explain why Romney votes trended upward while
Paul and Santorum votes trended downward -yet only in large precincts.</p><p class="indent">Choquette then looked at all 50 states and found
roughly a 10% switch in votes from GOP to Democrat everywhere except
Utah, where the presumption was, as it was Mitt's religious home state
and very conservative, there was no chance of Romney losing.</p><p class="indent">Choquette even saw in Maricopa County, which is
Phoenix and its suburbs, that in 2008 Romney used this technique against
John McCain. But McCain beat him by too much for a 10% fraud gain to
matter. McCain tried to do the same thing in the general election to
President Obama but 9 million votes nationally were too many to make up.</p><p class="indent">Examining every county across America was too massive
an undertaking for any one person so he included a simple set of
instructions and encouraged others to do the same with raw vote totals
in their county/state.</p>
<ul>
<blockquote>
<li><p>Download the text files of all raw actual vote results by precinct from the Secretary of State's Office.</p>
</li>
<br>
<li>Arrange them in precinct order.</li>
<br>
<li>Put in all of the candidate totals for each precinct.</li>
<br>
<li>Sort the data by total vote smallest on the top.</li>
</blockquote>
</ul><p class="indent">Now here it gets a bit dense: He needed to add columns
that show cumulative totals by candidate then compare them by candidate
to establish trend lines.</p><p class="indent">That reveals trends should remain statistically constant throughout an election.</p><p class="indent"><strong>Stealing Votes</strong></p><p class="indent">But as the spreadsheet shows, the larger the precinct, the numbers start to change dramatically.</p><p class="indent">"If percentages did not change from one precinct to
the next, we would see a flat line, but what we are seeing is sloped
lines downward for Democrats and upward for Republicans (or, in the case
of the Presidential primary, upward for Romney and downward for his
opponents), said Duniho."</p><p class="indent">In every election contest, the trend lines
dramatically crossed for no apparent reason. It was revealed that votes
were being systemically bled off for Rick Santorum and Ron Paul and then
being credited to Mitt Romney.</p><p class="indent">Once Duniho completed the spreadsheet, he pumped in actual vote totals from other Arizona election contests.</p><p class="indent">He looked at every 2010 race in Arizona from Governor
Brewer to Senator McCain and Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. The trends
lines all did the exact same thing. Someone had manipulated the election
outcome, most likely one person inserting a programme inside the
system's central computer… that flipped votes.</p><p class="indent">The results were astounding.</p><p class="indent">They showed that Governor Brewer actually lost her
election and Gabby Gifford's razor thin less than 1% point re-election
victory over Tea Party Conservative Jesse Kelly was closer to a 20 point
victory for her.</p><p class="indent">Duniho added, "We need to have strong hand count
audits to confirm the integrity of these elections. This means comparing
hand counts with official reports of the election."</p><p class="indent"><strong>Ohio Precedent</strong></p><p class="indent">This isn't the first time Republicans have been
charged with vote theft. It happened in the 2004 presidential election,
in Ohio and Florida. In Ohio, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Connell" target="_blank">GOP consultant Michael Connell</a>
claimed that the vote count computer program he had created for the
state had a trap door that shifted Democratic votes to the GOP.</p><p class="indent">He was subpoenaed as a witness in a lawsuit against
then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, and lawyers for the plaintiff
asked the Dept. of Justice to provide him with security because there
were two threats made against Connell's life by people associated with
Karl Rove. But in Dec. 2008, before the trial began, Connell was killed
in a plane crash outside Akron Ohio.</p><p class="indent">There were problems in Florida, as well.</p><p class="indent">A study by the Quantitative Methods Research Team at
the University of California at Berkeley found that anomalies between
Florida counties using touch-screen voting and those using other methods
could not be explained statistically. Noting the higher-than-expected
votes for Bush in three large Democratic counties, Miami-Dade, Broward
and Palm Beach, Michael Hout, a Berkeley professor who did the study
said <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/vote-n24.shtml" target="_blank">there were strong suspicions of vote-rigging</a>.</p><p class="indent">"No matter how many factors and variables we took into
consideration, the significant correlation in the votes for President
Bush and electronic voting cannot be explained," Hout said. "The study
shows that a county's use of electronic voting resulted in a
disproportionate increase in votes for President Bush. There is just a
trivial probability of evidence like this appearing in a population
where the true difference is zero - less than once in a thousand
chances."</p><p class="indent"><strong>Don't Trust, Verify</strong></p><p class="indent">Indeed the only way to 100% verify this election fraud
would be through handcounts of ballots by precinct, matching those
results to the reported totals. But as was mentioned earlier, a group in
Pima County has been trying unsuccessfully to get access to ballots to
conduct such a count for almost five years since anomalies first
surfaced in voting machines in 2006.</p><p class="indent">Is there a judge in Arizona likely to suddenly reverse
past trends and allow access to conduct such a handcount of ballots 12
days before a national election? And if not, why not? Maybe someone
needs to commission the Anonymous hacker group to re-level the playing
field because the courts are not going to do it.</p><p class="indent">The results of Duniho's analysis can only happen if
votes are being stolen, and the only way that's possible is if the
computerised machines are programmed to steal them. Welcome to Zimbabwe.</p><p class="indent">More than 100 million Americans will cast their
ballots thinking their vote will be fairly counted. It should be. Yet
the crooks know they can safely flip up to 10% of votes without
consequence. Anything more than that is statistically suspect.</p><p class="indent">President Obama won by such a huge margin in 2008 that
even with this anomaly built into the system, he cruised to victory.
This year the election is much closer. Can American democracy afford yet
another election crisis placing three of the four last national
Presidential election results in question or worse: The outcome was
stolen, the outcome a victim of election theft?</p><p class="indent"><strong>Don't Take Our Word</strong></p><p class="indent">Use the spreadsheet above to do the maths in your own
state, county or precinct. The results are compelling. Then demand that
the Justice Department stop this insane view that results need to be
reported by 11 pm for the television networks. Demand hand ballot
counts!</p><p class="indent">We use paper ballots in the UK and results do not even
begin to trickle in until 3 am. The final outcome can take up to three
days to finalise. But voters in Britain know the count is accurate
because every ballot is transparently hand-counted. When I read this <a href="http://bit.ly/TR7bUV" target="_blank">article that Serbia, Belarus and Kazakhstan were sending election monitors</a> to watch the US Election?, I knew we'd jumped the shark.</p><p class="indent">We are already being victimized by vote fraud on a
scale that, in another country, would lead to calls for international
election monitors. It is time for Americans to stop being victims of
ghosts in the machine.</p>
<hr style="width: 25%;" size="3"><p class="indent"><em><strong> Denis G. Campbell</strong> is the author
of 6 books including ‘Billionaire Boys Election Freak Show,' ‘The Vagina
Wars' & ‘Egypt Unsh@ckled.' He is the editor of UK Progressive
Magazine and provides commentary to the BBC, itv Al Jazeera English,
CNN, MSNBC and others. His weekly ‘World View with Denis Campbell'
segment can be heard every Thursday on the globally syndicated The David
Pakman Show. You can follow him on Twitter via @UKProgressive and on
Facebook. </em></p></body></html>