Forums

Surprise, voter fraud in Detroit.

Surprise, voter fraud in Detroit.

Report: Evidence of Detroit Voter Fraud, Too Many Votes in 37% of Precincts
Michigan Voter AP
by BEN KEW
14 Dec 2016
704
Voting machines in 37 per cent of Detroit precincts recorded more votes than mathematically possible during November’s presidential election, according to records obtained by The Detroit News.
Reports obtained by the newspaper from Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett found that in 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, more votes had been counted than the number of people who had been marked as having voted, which might serve as evidence of voter fraud across the city.

Following the report, Michigan’s Secretary of State Ruth Johnson announced plans to conduct a full investigation into the irregularities. Detroit was one of the areas in which Hillary Clinton’s support was particuarly strong.

“We’re assuming there were (human) errors, and we will have discussions with Detroit election officials and staff in addition to reviewing the ballots,” said Michigan’s Elections Director Chris Thomas on Monday.

vperl | 15 December, 2016

Leftists,, haters, and you losers, yep recount that.

vperl | 16 December, 2016

Flash, Democrat Machine is caught. SURPRISE.

Chunky Jr. | 16 December, 2016

I thought the machines malfunctioned

bigd | 16 December, 2016

hmmmm where is my stalker red on this one

vperl | 16 December, 2016

Mayor Daily of Chicago fame would be tickled green with envey for the voting of dead folks, and multiple votes from one Democrat.

Be proud of your legacy democrats, for decades Daily delivered tens of thousands of votes using dead folks, and smoke. Not a secret. People in power were very pleased.

vperl | 16 December, 2016

Mayor Daily of Chicago fame would be tickled green with envey for the voting of dead folks, and multiple votes from one Democrat.

Be proud of your legacy democrats, for decades Daily delivered tens of thousands of votes using dead folks, and smoke. Not a secret. People in power were very pleased.

Tâm | 16 December, 2016

https://www.democracynow.org/2016/12/13/greg_palast_by_rejecting_recount_is

"Well, you know, people are looking for Russians, but what we had is a real Jim Crow election.

Trump, for example, in Michigan, won by less than 11,000 votes.

It looks like we had about 55,000 voters, mostly minorities, removed by this racist system called Crosscheck.

In addition, you had a stoppage—even before the courts ordered the complete stop of the vote in Michigan, you had the Republican state officials completely sabotage the recount. They said, in Detroit, where there were 75,335 supposedly blank ballots for president—75,000—they said you can’t count 59 percent of the precincts, where most of the votes were missing.

There were 87 machines in Detroit that were—that didn’t function.

They were supposed to count about a thousand ballots each. You’re talking about a massive blockade of the black vote in Detroit and Flint, enough votes, undoubtedly, to overturn that election.

And you saw a mirror of this in Wisconsin, where, for example, there were many, many votes, thousands of votes, lost in the Milwaukee area, another African-American-heavy area.

And there, instead of allowing that eyeball count of the votes that are supposedly blank, they said, "Oh, we’ll just run them back through the machines." It’s like betting on an instant replay. It’s the same game. They just put them through the bad machines again. This is not just a bad way to count the ballots; it’s a way to not count African-American ballots.

And I want to emphasize that, Amy, which is that when we use the term "recount," we’re actually talking about ballots that were never counted in the first place—way over 75,000 in Michigan.

There are enough ballots uncounted that if you looked at them with the human eye, because the machines—these are terrible machines which can’t read your little bubble marks next to the candidate’s name on the piece of paper. If the human eye looks at these things, it’s easy to tell that someone voted for a presidential candidate. A lot of the machines said that they voted for two candidates. Not many people do that. The human eye could do that.

But the question is: Where are these ballots not counted?

They are not counted in African-American areas, in Dearborn, where there’s a heavy Arab-American community, in Latino communities. So, while we’re discussing hacking the machines, a lot of this was old-fashioned Jim Crow tactics, you know, from way back.

And by the way, a lot of this is the result of the destruction and the gutting of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which this is the first election post the Voting Rights Act. So, we saw—and Jill Stein said it correct—she expected to see a lot of hacking. What she found was, as she said, a Jim Crow election.

vperl | 16 December, 2016

The article speaks for itself.

Your spin is smoke. Get a life.

You lost..

ROLF

LOL

O:-)

vperl | 16 December, 2016

The article speaks for itself.

Your spin is smoke. Get a life.

You lost..

ROLF

LOL

O:-)

vperl | 16 December, 2016

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2016/12/12/records-many-v...

0:00
/
0:00

Share MediaShow Caption
POLITICS
Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit’s precincts
Facebook
Twitter
Email
Aa
_
+
Joel Kurth, and Jonathan Oosting | The Detroit News
Updated 3 days ago
Voting machines in more than one-third of all Detroit precincts registered more votes than they should have during last month’s presidential election, according to Wayne County records prepared at the request of The Detroit News.

Detailed reports from the office of Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett show optical scanners at 248 of the city’s 662 precincts, or 37 percent, tabulated more ballots than the number of voters tallied by workers in the poll books. Voting irregularities in Detroit have spurred plans for an audit by Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson’s office, Elections Director Chris Thomas said Monday.

DETROIT NEWS
Detroit’s voting irregularities spur state audit

The Detroit precincts are among those that couldn’t be counted during a statewide presidential recount that began last week and ended Friday following a decision by the Michigan Supreme Court.
Democrat Hillary Clinton overwhelmingly prevailed in Detroit and Wayne County. But Republican President-elect Donald Trump won Michigan by 10,704 votes or 47.5 percent to 47.3 percent.

Overall, state records show 10.6 percent of the precincts in the 22 counties that began the retabulation process couldn’t be recounted because of state law that bars recounts for unbalanced precincts or ones with broken seals.
The problems were the worst in Detroit, where discrepancies meant officials couldn’t recount votes in 392 precincts, or nearly 60 percent. And two-thirds of those precincts had too many votes.
“There’s always going to be small problems to some degree, but we didn’t expect the degree of problem we saw in Detroit. This isn’t normal,” said Krista Haroutunian, chairwoman of the Wayne County Board of Canvassers.
State officials are planning to examine about 20 Detroit precincts where ballot boxes opened during the recount had fewer ballots than poll workers had recorded on Election Day.

“We’re assuming there were (human) errors, and we will have discussions with Detroit election officials and staff in addition to reviewing the ballots,” Thomas said.
The Detroit News last week was first to report that more than half of Detroit would be ineligible for the recount because of the irregularities. The results were based on county reports obtained by The News.
The new report, compiled by Wayne County elections officials, sheds light on the extent of the problems and shows a systematic tendency toward counting more votes than the previous Wayne County report, which didn’t specify if precincts had over-counted or under-counted ballots.
Republican state senators last week called for an investigation in Wayne County, including one precinct where a Detroit ballot box contained only 50 of the 306 ballots listed in a poll book, according to an observer for Trump.

City officials have told state officials that ballots in that precinct were never taken out of a locked bin below the voting machine tabulator on Election Day, said Secretary of State spokesman Fred Woodhams.
“That’s what we’ve been told, and we’ll be wanting to verify it,” Woodhams said. “At any rate, this should not have happened.”
The state is not calling the audit an investigation, “but based on what we find, it could lead to more,” he said.
City Clerk Janice Winfrey and Elections Director Daniel Baxter did not return multiple messages.
Audit ‘good place to start’
State Sen. Patrick Colbeck, R-Canton, called the planned audit “a good place to start” that could help determine whether Detroit elections workers “followed the correct procedures” or “fraudulent procedures” on Election Day.

Whether a poll book mismatch suggests there are too few or too many ballots in any given precinct, “it’s concerning,” said Colbeck, who spearheaded the request for probe. “It’s supposed to reconcile to zero.”
It’s unclear how many votes were added in Detroit. That’s because county officials have not tabulated how much the ballots were off in precincts with discrepancies of at least five votes.
Of the data available, though, machines tallied at least 388 more ballots, according to a Detroit News analysis of the records. That’s 0.16 percent of the 248,000 ballots cast in the city that voted for Clinton 95 percent to 3 percent over Trump.
Haroutunian said she didn’t know what to make of the trend toward over-counting because there was no explanation from Detroit poll workers. The city had another 34 precincts that were out of balance, but they included explanations for the discrepancies.

Under state law, those precincts could be recounted because there were explanations. The law states that original results stand in precincts that can’t be recounted.
Washtenaw County Elections Director Ed Golembiewski said discrepancies tend to “even themselves out” — there are usually about as many precincts whose machines report more votes than fewer votes. But he said the large number of precincts with over-votes in Detroit isn’t necessarily significant.
“It’s usually human error,” Golembiewski said. “I have not seen anyone intentionally try to run an extra ballot. You aren’t going to rig an election three ballots at a time. You’re going to need a far more systematic and thorough approach than a couple of people here and there stuffing three extra ballots.”
In Washtenaw County, 23 of 150 precincts, about 15 percent, could not be recounted. Other counties with high percentages of unrecountable precincts include Branch (27 percent); Cass (24 percent); Wayne (24 percent) and Ionia (24 percent).

Who’s responsible for errors?
Last week, Baxter told The News 87 optical scanners broke on Election Day. He said many jammed when voters tried repeatedly to stuff single ballots into scanners, which can result in erroneous vote counts if poll workers don’t adjust counters.
Former Detroit mayoral candidate Tom Barrow, who has challenged the city’s elections process for years, said blaming workers is a cop-out. According to city protocol, all precincts are supposed to be balanced when the ballot boxes are sealed at the end of the night, he said.
“The city is responsible. Janice Winfrey is responsible,” Barrow said. “This didn’t happen because of crazy, dyslexic senior citizens who are working as poll workers, like they want to portray this. That’s people who are trying to deny responsibility.”
Continue reading below
NEWS
Metro Detroit faces up to 6 inches of snow
NEWS
Suspect arrested in connection to West Bloomfield woman's death
NEWS
Sterling Heights man charged in sex trafficking case
NEWS
Former Packard plant owner strikes plea deal with feds
NEWS
Gymnastics doctor indicted on child porn charges
He has asserted on social media that Winfrey cost Clinton the election in Michigan.
Others said there could be benign explanations.
Detroit’s ballot was two pages because it included dozens of candidates for the local Board of Education. The number of pages can cause machines to jam and lead them to count too many ballots, said Genesee County Clerk John Gleason.

“Usually, if there’s a problem, it tends to be more voters than votes,” he said. “But when we’re off, we should be very, very close, like one ballot.”
Genesee County, which like Wayne County is heavily Democratic, couldn’t recount 14 of the 142 precincts it had started before the court scuttled the process. Gleason took office in 2013 and said he had to “ride herd” over city clerks to ensure they reconciled precincts.
“Nothing is perfect. You have paper. You have humidity. You have people hanging onto ballots,” Gleason said.
“So there’s reasons, but there should be no excuses.”
jkurth@detroitnews.com
joosting@detroitnews.com
Twitter: @joeltkurth
Detroit’s mismatched votes
Here is a breakdown of the irregularities in Detroit’s 662 precincts:
■236 precincts in balance — equal numbers of voters counted by workers and machines
■248 precincts with too many votes and no explanation (77 were 1 over; 62 were 2 over, 37 were 3 over, 20 were 4 over, 52 were 5 or more over).

■144 precincts with too few votes and no explanation (81 were 1 under, 29 were 2 under; 19 were 3 under; 7 were 4 under; 8 were 5 or more under)
■34 precincts out of balance but with an explanation
Source: Wayne County Clerk’s Office
Originally Published 11:30 p.m. ET Dec.

vperl | 16 December, 2016

Twitter: @joeltkurth
Detroit’s mismatched votes
Here is a breakdown of the irregularities in Detroit’s 662 precincts:
■236 precincts in balance — equal numbers of voters counted by workers and machines
■248 precincts with too many votes and no explanation (77 were 1 over; 62 were 2 over, 37 were 3 over, 20 were 4 over, 52 were 5 or more over).

■144 precincts with too few votes and no explanation (81 were 1 under, 29 were 2 under; 19 were 3 under; 7 were 4 under; 8 were 5 or more under)
■34 precincts out of balance but with an explanation
Source: Wayne County Clerk’s Office
Originally Published 11:30 p.m. ET Dec.

Tâm | 17 December, 2016

@vperl:

It's well known that there were 87 defective scanners on the voting day.

That's why Dr Jill Stein demanded a human eye recount.

Michigan Supreme Court gave the order to stop the recount so there was no way to get the true count.

The problems are:

1) Cross Check list that eliminates minority/black/latino names: 55,000 votes.
2) Broken scanners in primarily minority/black/latino areas: Another "blank" 75,335 votes.
3) No recount allowed as ordered by Michigan Supreme Court.

brando | 17 December, 2016

war machine is safe?
http://www.congressionaldish.com/cd140-the-war-mongers-plan/#more-2098

how our representatives actually work, if you want to call it work or imply it is working for anyone but corporate citizens
https://youtu . be/hbrWTbT8u8c

compchat | 18 December, 2016

@Tam

More leftist, looser, craploa served up to explain why the democrats lost the election.

This crosscheck system is designed to catch people who voted twice. In researching it come to find out that it's been around since the early 2000s. The democrats always scream about it when they loose an election but never have done anything about it AND the claim that thousands of votes were not counted due to some Republican scam is crazy.

But there are always whiners and sore losers. All you have are accusations without actual data.

Show us the data that 55K "names" were eliminated (maybe it true it is a sign of how wide spread democratic fraud is in Michigan). 75 K blank "votes". Prove it. If there's a problem with the voting machines then they should have been fixed decades ago. NOT a republican problem. How do you know that these broken scanners are not equally problematic in white areas ?

If the machines can't read the votes then humans cannot infer the intent of the voter. Hanging chads are Hanging. Are they punched or not ? Is a small point of pencil mark a vote or note.

And Remember this all happened under Obama's watch. 8 years of it. Maybe you should ask him why this happened (supposedly).

lilbean | 18 December, 2016

What's the difference between whining and winning?

There is no "H" in winning :-)

vperl | 18 December, 2016

But, there is the "cry" in baby

Tâm | 18 December, 2016

@compchat

1) Purpose:

I am not explaining why Democrats lost the election.

The title of the thread is "fraud."

I am pointing the facts that there has been legal systematic method in implementing Jim Crow Election style.

It is about the right to vote regardless of what party a person belongs to.

Why that method is not stopped and why main stream is not covering it is the problem.
2) Interstate Crosscheck List
If you look at the crosscheck list:

It considers the following group of 3 different names as the same one criminal person who registers 3 times:

http://i.imgur.com/UmY1B53.png

Jason Thomas Hernandez
Jason H Hernandez
Jose D Hernandez

The following group of 2 different names is listed as the same one criminal person who registers 2 times:

http://i.imgur.com/fcnQkiW.png

Michael Lewis Brown
Michael James Brown

Fred Woohams, Michigan Secretary of State denies targeting minority names because there are white people with those names too.

3) No Hang Chads:

Michigan and Wisconsin do not use ballots with holes so there is no Florida of hanging chads there.

http://i.imgur.com/k67wB2B.png

They use optical scanners to scan for darken marks of a bubble or circle.

Wisconsin allowed recount but only by the same machines so if those didn't notice a specific darken mark on a ballot to begin with, it will continue to do so no matter how many times to feed the ballot back.

The gold standard should be by human eyes.
4) Proof:
Michigan Supreme Court nullified the permission for Dr Jill Stein to do the re-count so there is no concrete proof of the result.

Delivering 87 defective ballot machines to minority should be investigated.

Each of those defective machines can roll in and spit out 1,000 ballots.

There are about 75,000 ballots read as "blank."

Fred Woohams, Michigan Secretary of State does not deny that they are blank. He reasoned that people just got fed up and didn't vote for either one, thus it's blank, not because of defective machine that couldn't scan a darken mark on a ballot.

There should be a forensic study of those machines because Michigan Officials' theories for counting such a huge number of votes as blank is not reasonable.

The proof is reported by Greg Palast, Rolling Stone reporter:

https://youtu.be/qxsH0ExE7jU

vperl | 18 December, 2016

Rolling Stone, the same rolling stone that reported falsely just a few months ago.

Google the fraud, the lies, and allegations of campus rape.

Google the Rolling Stone articles.

Believe the RS, believe in lies.

Using the RS as fact is a laugh

compchat | 19 December, 2016

@Tam,

I wonder if you would be complaining had Hiliary won the election. Oh, then the defects in the voting system wouldn't matter.

The election is over. The results should be final today.

No system is perfect. NONE. Even medical testing has false positives and negatives. The positive prediction values of most good tests are around 80 percent if that. It would be impossible to have a voting system without any fraud or errors. It's a goal which isn't achievable. And, if it were achieved the Democrats would still complain, moan, groan and cry like little babys about the results if it wasn't to their liking.

vperl | 19 December, 2016

You are a false, false.

You lost

GTFA

finman100 | 19 December, 2016

FT2016

ckcland2 | 19 December, 2016

+1 Lilbean !!!

Tâm | 19 December, 2016

@compchat

I will still raise the question to make sure every vote will count someday in future.

I would accept an order for a ban on an official recount but scholars and investigators should be allowed to conduct an informal count and machine forensic that will not have the power to correct the already announced announced result to make sure the voting system will be corrected in future.

lilbean | 19 December, 2016

xo

vperl | 19 December, 2016

Get an informal recount
Of the Kennedy, Nixon election in Detroit and Chicago nothing has changed.

Everyone knew when
Kennedy was elected there was fraud.... Read about it no one cared then, the Democrat Machine with take you on and bury you... No one was foolish to try to expose the obvious.

kevin | 19 December, 2016

Never attribute to fraud something equally explained by plain old human error. The numbers involved seem far too small to be meaningful fraud.

I served as a poll worker in the 2016 election (not in Michigan) and I know that things can get hectic at times and someone might not get marked as having voted. It didn't happen at my precinct (which didn't have any crowds), but it almost did a couple of times.

Move along. Nothing to see here.