http://www.ukprogressive.co.uk/breaking-retired-nsa-analyst-proves-gop-is-
stealing-elections/article20598.html
NSA Analyst Proves GOP Is Stealing Elections
1.2K
Politics | Denis G Campbell | October 25, 2012 6:00 PM
By Denis G. Campbell and
Charley James
(c) 25 October 2012
UPDATED: Why 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
maths 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.
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) insist there is no
conflict between massively supporting one party financially whilst
controlling the machines that record and count the votes.
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.
The bigger the precinct (x axis) the higher the number of votes for
Romney and corresponding decrease for Santorum and Paul when all lines
should look like the Gingrich line. (Source: MA Duniho)
“Easy to Cheat”
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 2006 RTA Bond issue election 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.”
When Duniho applied a mathematical model to actual voting results in the
largest voting precincts, 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.
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.
Nose Counting
The idea of examining large precinct results came via a link to a report
written by Francois Choquette and James Johnson. 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?
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.
Choquette then looked at all 50 states and found roughly a 10% switch in
votes from Democrat to GOP. This was noted in every state except Utah,
where the presumption was, as it was Mitt’s religious home state and very
conservative, there was no chance of Romney losing and no variance was
found.
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.
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.
1. Download the text files of all raw actual vote results by precinct
from the Secretary of State’s Office.
2. Arrange them in precinct order.
3. Put in all of the candidate totals for each precinct.
4. Sort the data by total vote smallest on the top.
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.
That reveals trends should remain statistically constant throughout an
election.
Stealing Votes
But as the spreadsheet shows, the larger the precinct, the numbers start
to change dramatically.
“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.”
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.
Once Duniho completed the spreadsheet, he pumped in actual vote totals
from other Arizona election contests.
Chart showing Barber v Kelly special election to replace Gabby Giffords
result in Pima County where the margin of victory was too large even with
the supposed 'fix' in to overcome.
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.
The results were astounding.
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.
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.”
Ohio Precedent
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, GOP consultant Michael Connell claimed that the vote count
computer program he had created for the state had a trap door that
shifted Democratic votes to the GOP.
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.
There were problems in Florida, as well.
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 there were
strong suspicions of vote-rigging.
“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.”
Don’t Trust, Verify
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Don’t Take Our Word
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!
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 article that Serbia, Belarus
and Kazakhstan were sending election monitors to watch the US Election?,
I knew we’d jumped the shark.
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.