PDA

View Full Version : Computer scientists urge Clinton campaign to challenge election results



Teh One Who Knocks
11-23-2016, 12:04 PM
By Dan Merica, CNN


http://i.imgur.com/Ty2zXap.jpg

(CNN) Hillary Clinton's campaign is being urged by a number of top computer scientists to call for a recount of vote totals in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, according to a source with knowledge of the request.
The computer scientists believe they have found evidence that vote totals in the three states could have been manipulated or hacked and presented their findings to top Clinton aides on a call last Thursday.

The scientists, among them J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, told the Clinton campaign they believe there is a questionable trend of Clinton performing worse in counties that relied on electronic voting machines compared to paper ballots and optical scanners, according to the source.

http://i.imgur.com/T9kvd2C.jpg

The group informed John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman, and Marc Elias, the campaign's general counsel, that Clinton received 7% fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic voting machines, which the group said could have been hacked.

Their group told Podesta and Elias that while they had not found any evidence of hacking, the pattern needs to be looked at by an independent review.

Neither Halderman nor John Bonifaz, an attorney also pressing the case, responded to requests for comment on Tuesday evening. Their urging was first reported by New York magazine.

A message left with President-elect Donald Trump's transition team also was not immediately returned.There were widespread concerns about hacking ahead of this month's election, including the Obama administration accusing Russia of attempting to breach voter registration data. But election officials and cybersecurity experts said earlier this month that it is virtually impossible for Russia to influence the election outcome.

A former Clinton aide declined to respond to questions about whether they will request an audit based on the findings.

Additionally, at least three electors have pledged to not vote for Trump and to seek a "reasonable Republican alternative for president through Electoral College," according to a statement Wednesday from a group called the Hamilton Electors, which represents them.

"The Founding Fathers created the Electoral College as the last line of defense," one elector, Michael Baca, said in a statement, "and I think we must do all that we can to ensure that we have a reasonable Republican candidate who shares our American values."

Teh One Who Knocks
11-23-2016, 12:04 PM
Their group told Podesta and Elias that while they had not found any evidence of hacking, the pattern needs to be looked at by an independent review.

:rolleyes:

deebakes
11-23-2016, 05:59 PM
:ffs:

Goofy
11-23-2016, 06:50 PM
:lol:

Those poor special little snowflakes :empathy:

Loser
11-25-2016, 07:26 PM
I've explained this so much to people it's getting redundant.

Pennsylvania will NOT recount unless you can PROVE massive voter fraud, because the margin is greater then .5% He won the state by 1.2%

End of story. Doesn't matter how much money you throw at the state.

PorkChopSandwiches
11-26-2016, 03:29 PM
Besides, Soros voting machines wouldn't have favored Trump

perrhaps
11-27-2016, 03:07 AM
What I submit is occurring here is that the Clintons are using this half-baked maneuver to broker a deal.

Bill and Hillary are petrified of Trump changing his mind again after taking office and appointing an independent prosecutor empowered to initiate grand jury proceedings with an eye toward charging them, and daughter Chelsea among others, with a boatload of offenses pertaining to influence peddling and Hillary's private server, and the significant amount of obstruction of justice pertaining to both areas.

By saying he's reconsidering his campaign platform/promise that he'll do this, Trump has deftly outmaneuvered the Clintons and Obama. If he had insisted now that he was still going to investigate prosecuting her, it would have given Obama an excuse to pardon the Clintons before he leaves office, under the guise that the pardons are necessary to "accelerate our nation's healing process in light of the election results", or some other such happy horseshit. But, if he pardons them now, when Trump has seemingly closed the door on this option of prosecution, he'll in effect brand the Clintons as pariahs. The Clinton Foundation would go "poof", as would all of the future lucrative speaking offers.

This has put the Clintons between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Do they live with the threat of prosecution over their heads for the next four years, or do they go sniveling to Obama for a pardon in the next two months?

Instead of each of these two mortifying options, the dynamic duo have launched this challenge nonsense. I'd bet my entire retirement savings that they've already reached out to Trump's people and hinted that the challenges will be withdrawn in return for some sort of written assurance that there will be no prosecutions.

Problem with this political "Plan 9 From Outer Space" is that Loser is absolutely correct about PA law (I know this based upon my 37+ years in a profession here in PA that has made me very knowledgeable about this).

The bigger problem for these slicksters is, to paraphrase our present President, "Challenging elections has consequences". Expect an announcement in the next two weeks or so, that, after careful reconsideration, and in the interest of national unity, blah, blah, blah, the Clinton campaign will be withdrawing its joinder to these challenges.

Hikari Kisugi
11-27-2016, 08:16 AM
I think it is worth checking, if someone is happy to stump up the cash for the first two sites.
See what the result is, one would assume no different, in this situation, then he can demonstrate beyond any doubt that the result should stand.
Better to eliminate the doubt, as the BSers will just spend 4 years bleating about it otherwise.

RBP
11-27-2016, 08:25 AM
I think it is worth checking, if someone is happy to stump up the cash for the first two sites.
See what the result is, one would assume no different, in this situation, then he can demonstrate beyond any doubt that the result should stand.
Better to eliminate the doubt, as the BSers will just spend 4 years bleating about it otherwise.

You think that will stop it? :lol:

My own sister still rants about how Gore won 2000.

deebakes
11-27-2016, 03:09 PM
well he did :shrug:

RBP
11-27-2016, 04:27 PM
well he did :shrug:

:x

Hikari Kisugi
11-27-2016, 05:14 PM
You think that will stop it? :lol:

My own sister still rants about how Gore won 2000.

Yeah, that was a clear one. :P

lost in melb.
11-28-2016, 01:07 PM
What about analysing the states that Clinton one

Pony
11-28-2016, 01:29 PM
What about analysing the states that Clinton one

No,No we can't do that, especially states that don't require ID to vote, we just have to trust that everyone in those places is a legal citizen and would never vote fraudulently.