Voter Fraud 101

[CitizenBBN]

https://nypost.com/2020/08/29/politi...il-in-ballots/

Going to start a thread instead of stepping on others.

Here's a few highlights. Note none of these would be caught on any audit of which I am aware:

1. Phony Ballots.

He would fake the ballots, but had to collect the security envelopes from real voters.

He would have his operatives fan out, going house to house, convincing voters to let them mail completed ballots on their behalf as a public service. The fraudster and his minions would then take the sealed envelopes home and hold them over boiling water.

“You have to steam it to loosen the glue,” said the insider.

He then would remove the real ballot, place the counterfeit ballot inside the signed certificate, and reseal the envelope.
“Five minutes per ballot tops,” said the insider.

2. Dump the ballots


The tipster said sometimes postal employees are in on the scam.

“You have a postman who is a rabid anti-Trump guy and he’s working in Bedminster or some Republican stronghold … He can take those [filled-out] ballots, and knowing 95% are going to a Republican, he can just throw those in the garbage.”

In 2017, more than 500 mail-in ballots in New York City never arrived to the Board of Elections for races that November — leaving hundreds disenfranchised. They eventually were discovered in April 2018. “For some undetermined reason, some baskets of mail that were bound to the New York City Board of Elections were put off to the side at the Brooklyn processing facility,” city elections boss Michael Ryan said at the time of discovery.

3. Nursing homes (one I think is so completely obvious)


Hitting up assisted-living facilities and “helping” the elderly fill out their absentee ballots was a gold mine of votes, the insider said.

“There are nursing homes where the nurse is actually a paid operative. And they go room by room by room to these old people who still want to feel like they’re relevant,” said the whistleblower. “[They] literally fill it out for them.”

FWIW, as someone who comes in behind a lot of home health services for the elderly, who have been robbed blind of jewelry and valuables by the staff, I'm quite sure it would be easy enough to get a nursing home worker to help out in such an enterprise.

4. Voter impersonation


When all else failed, the insider would send operatives to vote live in polling stations, particularly in states like New Jersey and New York that do not require voter ID. Pennsylvania, also for the most part, does not.

The best targets were registered voters who routinely skip presidential or municipal elections — information which is publicly available.

5. Old school - paying for votes

This one is obvious enough, round up the homeless and pay them to vote for you. Not reliable, but very old school.

6. Hiding your tracks

IN this article the guy says when he used mail in fraud he would bend an edge of the ballots so the Democratic operatives at the polling place knew not to object to tossing a ballot, so the fraud wouldn't be discovered.

The insider said any ballots offered up by him or his operation would come with a bent corner along the voter certificate — which contains the voter signature — so Democratic Board of Election counters would know the fix was in and not to object.
“It doesn’t stay bent, but you can tell it’s been bent,” the tipster said. “Until the [certificate] is approved, the ballot doesn’t matter. They don’t get to see the ballot unless they approve the [certificate.]”

“I invented bending corners,” the insider boasted, saying once the fixed ballots were mixed in with the normal ones, the bed was made. “Once a ballot is opened, it’s an anonymous ballot.”


Catch that last part. Once the ballot passes the test of the opening, it's an anonymous ballot.

What does that mean? It means it cannot be audited. You can't go back and randomly select 1,000 of them and call the people and check IF they voted, HOW they voted, etc.

So when you get told "the audit will find any fraud", think about it in light of this man's claims and the fact that, rightfully, our votes are not recorded in some database that links us to them.

If they can get the fake vote past that first wall it's really really hard to find the fraud.

And even if they find it you'd have a hard time proving it was widespread. For example say you used voter impersonation above, and you impersonated 500 people, and in an audit you find that 1-2 of those looked like they voted twice b/c the real person did vote and so did the fake. OK, how do you find the other 498? You don't, b/c that shows only one vote. Unless you call them all and ask them if they voted.

Does any state actually do that? Is so great, but I doubt it.

This system has deep flaws. Enough to make up 10% or 20% of the votes? No, but enough to throw it by 2 or 3%? That seems far more possible.

[dan_bgblue]

Be pretty embarrassing if we see this as a headline some day.

Organization of American States warns of sham elections in socialist Venezuela (United States of America)

[CitizenBBN]

I don't think our elections are as flawed as some Third Wold Country, but people who think this all above board with zero fraud are fooling themselves.

There's too much money and power involved for people to not be trying, just as there is too much money and power for there not to be all the foreign influence, the corporate and special interest lobbying, the massive PACs, etc. there's a reason people spend cumulative hundreds of millions of dollars on a US election.

yet we're to believe these obvious loopholes and weaknesses never get exploited b/c, having never really been very well investigated and some almost impossible to investigate due to privacy protections, no one has ever proven they are being so exploited.

It's a circular argument and fallacy. it would be like saying the only drug dealers in the US are those who have been convicted of drug dealing b/c we have no proof there are more.

What I'm calling for isn't even to get to that number, but simply to close the obvious security holes in the process so we KNOW they aren't exploited b/c they don't exist.

You want confidence in the elections? Do something to inspire confidence in them.

[dan_bgblue]

I don't think our elections are as flawed as some Third Wold Country

Just my opinion but I think we get closer and closer at each election for the Senate, and the Executive office.

[Catonahottinroof]

I’m a pretty big fan of Glenn Greenwald. We differ politically but his commentary on things going on is honest and usually dead square on point. He lives in Brazil and has for about 15 years or so. In a video on this topic he said in Brazil, polls close at 6 and results are complete by 11:00. His conclusion is our elections in the US are full of shenanigans from both directions. I wholeheartedly concur.

Just my opinion but I think we get closer and closer at each election for the Senate, and the Executive office.

[dan_bgblue]

https://www.gingrich360.com/2020/11/...stions-part-2/

[CitizenBBN]

Georgia verifies what was posted above, though it sounds like a newer rule. They separate the ballot from the envelope after they verify the signature on the ballot.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...-is-impossible


The point is that the audits will catch internal issues, but not external ones. I don't know how they verify the ballot to the voter roles, that's another question.

I really don't think you can collect, unseal and reseal tens of thousands of ballots, but I'm betting you can do hundreds. Use in concert with other techniques it seems like it could add up. Enough to throw an election? Depends on how close it is obviously.

[catmanjack]

Scan them after opening, just seems the mail in ballots leave a gray area.

[dan_bgblue]

Scan them after opening, just seems the mail in ballots leave a gray area.

Especially when they are mailed out to everyone with a mailing address in the state regardless of whether they are registered to vote or not.

[KeithKSR]

Georgia verifies what was posted above, though it sounds like a newer rule. They separate the ballot from the envelope after they verify the signature on the ballot.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...-is-impossible


The point is that the audits will catch internal issues, but not external ones. I don't know how they verify the ballot to the voter roles, that's another question.

I really don't think you can collect, unseal and reseal tens of thousands of ballots, but I'm betting you can do hundreds. Use in concert with other techniques it seems like it could add up. Enough to throw an election? Depends on how close it is obviously.

Georgia signature verification may hang them out to dry. The SOS didn’t follow state law and have signatures verified with file signatures. The looked at the signature on the inside envelope and outside envelope and compared them, all this did was confirm the same person signed both, but didn’t confirm the signee was the registered voter.

One problem they are encountering is that the number of votes in some of these cities outnumbers the voters. That is what the issue was in Wayne County, Michigan.

If there is an issue with mass fraud of mail in ballots the cure is to either nullify the election in that state, or randomly toss that number of mail in ballots from that jurisdiction.

[KeithKSR]

It is being alleged that Pennsylvania received 700,000 more mail in ballots than they sent out. I bet I know what counties received the extra ballots. If this is true the counties involved may have to randomly toss a number of mail in ballots equal to the extras they received.

[KeithKSR]

The Sidney Powell suit in Georgia alleges that 96,600 more mail in ballots were counted than were marked as returned by voters in the State. If you are going to prove that the stuffing of the ballot box occurred this is the kind of stuff you look for.

[VirginiaCat]

Chuck, here is the real question I have as a former auditor.

When I could not audit "through" the software we had to verify by auditing "around" the system and software. We really could not verify the logic and functions directly so had to look at known inputs and verify they processed the way we expected. In Finance that is looking at a sale amount and following it through the system and verifying the figures and bank account effects. Sales, AR, Cash, and AR again and then any sales adjustments to final number. Did the Sale occure and create an Accounts Receivable? Send a verification of the transaction to the Customer (best form of evidence is external verification). Reconcile the bank accouncts and look at deposits and canceled checks. Track and trace all intra bank account transfers etc.

In Voting, we do not know what is happning in those softwares. That means verification of the ballots. In this case, you must verify the person exists and cast the ballot, and had the right to cast the ballot. Period. Otherwise, you end up with a PharMore (Inventory Fraud) type situation where they create false sales and inventory or in this case voters and ballots.

[ukpumacat]

https://twitter.com/schneider_cm/sta...941466624?s=21

Strong words from a conservative Justice.

[dan_bgblue]

Chuck, here is the real question I have as a former auditor.

When I could not audit "through" the software we had to verify by auditing "around" the system and software. We really could not verify the logic and functions directly so had to look at known inputs and verify they processed the way we expected. In Finance that is looking at a sale amount and following it through the system and verifying the figures and bank account effects. Sales, AR, Cash, and AR again and then any sales adjustments to final number. Did the Sale occure and create an Accounts Receivable? Send a verification of the transaction to the Customer (best form of evidence is external verification). Reconcile the bank accouncts and look at deposits and canceled checks. Track and trace all intra bank account transfers etc.

In Voting, we do not know what is happning in those softwares. That means verification of the ballots. In this case, you must verify the person exists and cast the ballot, and had the right to cast the ballot. Period. Otherwise, you end up with a PharMore (Inventory Fraud) type situation where they create false sales and inventory or in this case voters and ballots.

Can we find a liberal anywhere that thinks any of that is necessary to ensure a valid and fraud free election process?

It seems like all that is necessary for them to accept that an election is free from fraud is for them to keep repeating that to themselves and then everyone is supposed to line up and agree with them.

[kingcat]

https://twitter.com/schneider_cm/sta...941466624?s=21

Strong words from a conservative Justice.

Strong and patriotic words indeed.

[ukpumacat]

Can we find a liberal anywhere that thinks any of that is necessary to ensure a valid and fraud free election process?

It seems like all that is necessary for them to accept that an election is free from fraud is for them to keep repeating that to themselves and then everyone is supposed to line up and agree with them.

What?! Of course it is necessary to have free and fair elections and eliminate fraud. Of course. And I don't know one liberal who doesn't think so.
Again, find it and fix it.
But liberal and conservative judges all over the US have seen the "Evidence" and dismissed these cases one after another. They are not alleging fraud in these cases. Go look them up. They are easy to find and read. Literally, Trumps own guy Barr said there was none (and then proceeded to have to go to the White House to be yelled at for 2 hours).

Let me show you a picture that will describe all you need to know about all of this fraud:

Attachment 9834

This was just from yesterday. Its absolutely ridiculous. Trump is spewing all of this nonsense, getting his followers fired up and having his network stooges play along. All to raise money. NOT for the election fraud. But to pay off campaign debt. And not only that, he gets to keep 75% of it moving forward for other causes (like defending himself in future lawsuits, etc).

Most candidates that lose close elections think they were cheated. And most losing parties think the other side cheated. Its as common as the cold. What is different in this case is you have a President who is committing outright fraud on his own supporters and sucking them dry for every last cent he can. Donald Trump is finishing his term as he has always been...a con man who is trying to make a buck. Its worked.
The guy has zero doubt whatsoever he has lost. He knows he has no chance of having this overturned. Its all a con to raise more money.

[VirginiaCat]

I think SCOTUS is being forced to step in now by Texas AG. Electors Clause of the US Const.

Basically saying that in the states were the Courts or Govt. changed the law they have disenfranchised the TX votes.

SCOTUS will be forced to hear this since it is a State vs State issue is what I understand...

[pdb]

Can we find a liberal anywhere that thinks any of that is necessary to ensure a valid and fraud free election process?

It seems like all that is necessary for them to accept that an election is free from fraud is for them to keep repeating that to themselves and then everyone is supposed to line up and agree with them.

And can we find a conservative anywhere that has found proof of fraud to the extent that it would change the winner of the election in any state? Or have the liberals so dominated the election process that documenting substantial fraud is impossible? Amazing how the liberals have such dominant force.

[VirginiaCat]

And can we find a conservative anywhere that has found proof of fraud to the extent that it would change the winner of the election in any state? Or have the liberals so dominated the election process that documenting substantial fraud is impossible? Amazing how the liberals have such dominant force.

Depends on how you define fraud.

To me, accepted a mailed in ballot that was not part of a legislatively approved absentee process is an unallowed vote do including them in the count is fraudulent. Going further, if they are counted they must be verified for existence of voter, the voter has a right to cast a ballot, and the the voter actually cast that ballot.

[KeithKSR]

Fraud is everywhere, and is easily found. The Ware County, Michigan vote test where an equal number of ballots for both Trump and Biden netted Biden a 26% margin speaks loudly. If the liberals aren’t afraid the fraud will be found, then why not allow ballots to be examined? It shouldn’t be that hard to identify ballots with different paper in Detroit. Georgia was in a rush to delete the election data from their machines, and doesn’t want the machines examined.

[CitizenBBN]

An election may get changed b/c 12 ballots were FOUND IN A DRAWER.

Yeah, with that kind of chain of custody control I can't imagine why people have little confidence in elections.

The entire system is absurdly antiquated, has gaping holes in the audit trail and chain of custody, and has obvious ways to cheat that are never even investigated or audited.

We know there is fraud. we find some every election, not a lot but some. The question is how much more exists that we don't know about, but b/c of the way things are done it's nearly impossible to investigate. The only procedures we have is to audit the actual handling of ballots, but no way to check how they got submitted. And even within the internals we see ballots in desk drawers, ballots "found" in boxes or under tables, etc.

the system is obviously deeply flawed. Anyone with any inventory control experience would die to see a business operated this way.

[ukpumacat]

Fraud is everywhere, and is easily found. The Ware County, Michigan vote test where an equal number of ballots for both Trump and Biden netted Biden a 26% margin speaks loudly. If the liberals aren’t afraid the fraud will be found, then why not allow ballots to be examined? It shouldn’t be that hard to identify ballots with different paper in Detroit. Georgia was in a rush to delete the election data from their machines, and doesn’t want the machines examined.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/11/vi...isinformation/

[kingcat]

Going just like predicted. Still amazing that democracy hangs by such a thin thread.

[catmanjack]

And is being run by such crooks!

[Catfan73]

The Supreme Court has spoken. NOW can we please respect the rule of law and stop all this ridiculousness?

[Catonahottinroof]

The Supreme Court ruled on abortion in 1973. That didn’t stop the talk about it. The talk won’t stop about this either.......

[dan_bgblue]

Best I can tell, based on these comments, it is not a ruling that the election
voting was done without fraud, but they ruled that Texas had not satisfied the requirements necessary to file suit to be ruled on by the supreme court.


The statement expressed that the court is obligated to hear interstate disputes, however, they did state that they were in agreement with the seven other justices in siding against Texas.

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,” the ruling states. “All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.”

[dan_bgblue]

New York House race

[UKHistory]

Best I can tell, based on these comments, it is not a ruling that the election
voting was done without fraud, but they ruled that Texas had not satisfied the requirements necessary to file suit to be ruled on by the supreme court.


The statement expressed that the court is obligated to hear interstate disputes, however, they did state that they were in agreement with the seven other justices in siding against Texas.

“Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections,” the ruling states. “All other pending motions are dismissed as moot.”

In this country we prove that crimes are committed not that there was no crime. If I am charged with murder, I am still innocent until proven guilty. If someone thinks I killed someone but they don't have enough proof to charge me, well I am not arrested let alone taken to court.

With the election, the fail safe option is that the tally is legitimate and accurate based on the state's certifying the results. We are not deliberating over 500 votes in one state. We are looking at hundreds of thousands of votes in multiple states.

Many local elected officials of both parties but certainly Republicans have applied the voting procedures of their respective state based on the system and not necessarily in favor of their candidate's party or perhaps the candidate for whom they voted.

We might not always like the results. But to those who followed the law without prejudice are to be celebrated.

And that includes the 2016 results that saw Trump when multiple nail biters in the rust belt to claim a rather substantive electoral college vote.

No question the Russians lobbied hard for Trump and for third party candidates who took votes from Clinton. But the Russian propaganda re-enforced positions held by Republicans and those who voted for Trump. There was no indication that any fraudulent votes were cast for Trump.