Author Topic: New Hampshire recount  (Read 639 times)

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
New Hampshire recount
« on: January 21, 2008, 01:25:33 AM »
Huge Diebold Disparities Uncovered In New Hampshire Recount   

Huge disparities between votes cast on Diebold electronic voting machines and actual hand counted tallies are emerging during the New Hampshire recount, with Hillary Clinton gaining the most from over a hundred unaccounted for votes in one Manchester Ward.

The recount in Manchester’s Ward 5 revealed a disparity whereby establishment candidates received over a hundred ‘black hole’ votes between them that could not be tallied during the hand count.

Diebold Result Hand Count

CLINTON 683 619
EDWARDS 255 217
OBAMA 404 365


At the moment there is no indication of where these extra votes came from, but the figures again cast the accuracy of Diebold voting machines into severe doubt and provide further evidence of the need for a return to hand counted paper ballots only in all federal elections.

Brad Friedman at The Brad Blog continues to provide great coverage of the recount, unlike New Hampshire’s foremost news outlet WMUR, whose "only source seems to be whatever (New Hampshire Secretary of State) Gardner tells them," according to Friedman.

In addition, 550 ballots in Stratham were not read by the Diebold machines at all and were rejected as blank ballots.

Voting Rights attorney John Bonifaz also told Friedman of his deep concerns about the transparency of both the initial election as well as the recount.

"I’m very concerned that this is not a fully transparent process that is happening there," he said.

Diebold memory cards used in New Hampshire, which have been proven to be vulnerable to hacking and could easily be used to steal an election, are "missing" according to state officials.

Bonifaz, "Says he was told by Secretary of State William Gardner that his office doesn’t get involved in tracking what happens to those memory cards. Some have reportedly been returned to LHS, and may have had their memory erased already," reports Friedman.

"When you have a private company counting 80% of the votes, and you later learn that the memory cards are unaccounted for, you have a serious question about the transparency and accountability in that process," Bonifaz said.

Federal law mandates that all materials from elections be preserved for 22 months thereafter, so if the memory cards have been wiped then LHS Associates, who it was revealed last week had hired a narcotics trafficker to a high-level executive position, would be facing criminal charges.

In another shocking development, vote fraud expert Bev Harris witnessed first hand that a majority of ballot boxes had 8 inch slits in their side. Election Defense Alliance’s Sally Castleman followed the boxes back to the ballot vault and also noticed the cuts. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: New Hampshire recount
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2008, 05:55:48 AM »
Officials admitting there were slit boxes and all the memory cards are missing.

Is anyone still defending the legitimacy of the NH results? Anyone?

youandme

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
Re: New Hampshire recount
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2008, 06:26:38 AM »
Move along folks nothing to see here. hehe

Results 

1) CLINTON 683 619
3) EDWARDS 255 217
2) OBAMA 404 365

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: New Hampshire recount
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2008, 07:16:17 AM »
Officials admitting there were slit boxes and all the memory cards are missing.

Is anyone still defending the legitimacy of the NH results? Anyone?
You're not going to get much a response.  People like to ignore this issue.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: New Hampshire recount
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2008, 08:28:46 AM »
A narcotics traffiker was in charge of the memory card for Diebold machines.

500 votes not counted by the machines.

Over a 100 vote counts added for all 3 canidates out of thin air.

Slits in boxes.

Americans should be screaming mad, but I have a feeling mainstream media won't even talk about this subject again although  I hope I'm wrong.

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63713
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: New Hampshire recount
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2008, 10:33:39 PM »
New Hampshire recount results
by Jason George

Remember New Hampshire?

The contest there might seem like years ago, but it was only about two weeks that Granite State voters went to the polls, with Rep Dennis Kucinich soon calling for a recount of those votes. Well that recount is now done – or at least has ended – on the Democratic side.

Yesterday, the NH secretary of state's office stopped the Democratic recount because the state had gone through the $27,000 Kunicich had paid to finance the process. By that point, the state had recounted about 40 percent of the ballots and saw no major problems, except for handfuls of votes being off because of human error. You can see the comparison here.

The recount on the Republican side began this morning with no word on when the task will be completed. The recount on that side is being paid for by Republican candidate Albert Howard, who will need nothing short of an act of God to turn the 44 votes he received on Jan. 9 into a victory. According to his Web site though, this might not be a problem, as Howard has a line in to the Almighty:
"The Angel of the Lord told me in January of 1992 that Hillary Rodham Clinton and I would meet and be running against each other and that she would lose."

Anyone in New Hampshire today can check out the recount, in person, at the State Archives and Records Management Building in Concord.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/new_hampshire_recount_results.html

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: New Hampshire recount
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2008, 10:41:19 PM »
How do they decipher if it was human counting error or if it was computer error?

I'll be interested in the Repub recount, (how far it goes).

On a slightly different note.

KING 5 News has determined that there are inconsistencies in the "votes" being counted and reported by the Washington State Republican party.

Throughout the vote reporting process, State Party Chairman Luke Esser has said the party is reporting the presidential preferences of the delegates who were elected at the caucuses. But today we learned that Snohomish County, the third-largest county in the state, reported the preferences of all caucus attendees instead of the elected delegates.

One Snohomish County caucus chairman told KING 5 that the delegate preferences are "dramatically different" than the attendee counts.

The Snohomish County Republican Party does not have the delegate preferences from many of its caucuses and is working to obtain them.