I don't know about you, but I think someone should test this theory NOW...

[buzzycrumbhunger]

.
""The Tabulation Systems at the County level were hacked far in advance of the election. [. . .]," states Stephen Spoonamore, a seasoned specialist "in conducting and/or finding such hacks." The text below is in its entirety his analysis:

The 2024 Election was hacked at the tabulation level.
I have a 25 year career, finding and/or conducting such hacks. It's easy-ish to do. GOP/Trump-Putin/Musk all have the resources, motivation and access to do it. Hand recount the 2 oddest precincts in each county. Solved.

Interesting. American Voting has been subject to repeated hacks since at least Bush vs Gore where hanging chads were just a distraction, the hack was in Valusia County. I was a leader in uncovering hacks in 2002 and 2004. When Bush hacked OH away from Kerry. No one cared. I stopped.

I continue to work professionally finding hackers, and fairly often DEVELOP AND INSTALL hacks designed to ferret out the misuse of systems. My customers have included numerous governments and F100 firms. I wrote risk assessments of smartgrid technologies for Obama, and IP e-protection for GE.

Here is what you are seeing. The Tabulation Systems at the County level were hacked far in advance of the election. The hack was probably written into the code even before the code was installed. It will have a WHEN function and IF/THEN functions to have the machine force balance to a given outcome within a specific window of time. You could test the machines 1000 times before election night, and the result will be correct. If you run it during the time window, the force balancing will be turned on and regardless of inputs you will get a programmed output.

It is very simple to prove this. Take the two most outlandish precinct results from any county and just hand-count the ballots. They won't match the tabulation outputs. From what I am seeing, you will find 8-11% avg. shifts from Dem to Rep. Be sure to check heavy Red areas, easier to cover up a run up of the score. That was how it was done in Ohio vs. Kerry - GOP flips in already highly red areas. Now, why the Bomb-Threats? They were NOT to allow for hacker access. The programming was already in place, they were to break Chain of Custody and produce legal grounds to not trust a recount. Every place that GOT a bomb-threat is a place the courts will now have to consider the factual argument of whether the ballots COULD have been tampered with while the evacuations were going on. They weren't. But that is the argument the GOP will make to prevent recounts.

I used to appear on Lou Dobbs TV Show, back when he was at CNN and discuss hacking, including of voting machines. I helped get machines into researchers hands - every single one of them were shocked/horrified how simple hacking the machines was. But somehow, the public has refused to engage.

Now that a full blown fascist takeover is underway, and they did it by hacking the tabulation machines as described, please engage. I will lend any expertise if asked, but be aware these people are sociopaths who will kill you, they have done so to others, so act accordingly.

And it was relatively easy. Perhaps 300-500 tabulators of 3 types with 24+ months of prep. You just saw 3000+ comms devices of 4+ types hacked with software and installed explosives. These were set off in waves and specific times to destroy Hamas. Same thing here.

My personal record. A team of 4, 11 months total operation time, we hacked 500 Point of Sale CreditCard machines to install added tracking software allowing the units to work correctly while also creating traces to catch CC money laundering which the retailer was in on. Same thing as election 2024.

And finally, let me say again, this is a simple, stupid, easy to prove hack. Hand Count most suspected 2 Precincts in each county. They won't match. And FWIW, I am currently working on a much harder hack larger in scale and much better executed. This election hack is just about political will."

Stephen Spoonamore

[Think. Again.]

1. Thank you for posting this.

Unfortunately, not enough people are concerned enough about getting the true results (as you can tell from the oddly vehement resistance to just checking the numbers), and so we will probably not see the few hand-counts it would take to expose all this.

It's true, our society really does get what it deserves.

[LiberaBlueDem]

13. Good job, dude

you have pointed out the fallacy of non-concern and the reality of being concerned about what counts our votes

it's our votes, damnit, and we demand a recount and that's all there is to it.

people who are on DU saying we can't see how our votes are counted are doing the trumps work as he sits and laughs at them and our votes

[Think. Again.]

15. I agree, and I hope they all realize that they could very well be complicit in the hellscape we are about go through.

[Tribetime]

33. I know i'm wrong but it doesn't pass the small test

It was like Harris was perfect and trump was trying to lose

[rainy]

2. You posted this 3 times:)

[Baitball Blogger]

4. This is the first time I've read it.

I have been avoiding threads that discuss this kind of thing, until recently.

[John Shaft]

7. they should post it 300 more times

fuck it

[Think. Again.]

16. 3 times. shocking.

[buzzycrumbhunger]

21. Crap.

I posted once from my phone and DU gave me a message that the action couldn’t be completed and to try again—from scratch. Wrote it again, previewed, and posted. I only saw it once after that. Maybe DuckDuckGo had a brain fart.

[rainy]

24. I just wanted you to know so you could delete before

people started posting on all 3😊

[FBaggins]

3. Still nonsense

He may know the basics of programming… he doesn’t know the first thing about elections.

What he’s describing is barely possible at the tabulation level and would impact vote totals announced on election night…

… but it could never survive the canvassing process - let alone the normal audits.

And let’s not forget that the shift was not in a few counties or states… it was virtually everywhere across the country. Thousands of counties and tens of thousands of precincts.

[moniss]

10. I'm not saying yes or no to this guy but when he

talks about taking only 2 he's not saying the problem is only in a limited area. He is saying that he feels it would only take examining the two worst precincts in order to show tabulator manipulation. He may be on to something or not. If the poll books balance to the total number of ballots then traditional "stuffing" etc. could be ruled out. My feeling has been that if, I repeat if, shenanigans happened it was likely a combination of things.

I think it is quite obvious that there was a multi-faceted effort to suppress Democratic votes by things like registration challenges, purging registrations etc. Combined with other shenanigans I have little doubt that there was an effect. How large it was is a matter for investigation rather than a back and forth about "yes they did/no they didn't". I have stated before that I am suspect of this idea of tons of new registrations on their side all being legit. I believe that it is nonsense to take it on faith that every registration is physically verified. Simply presenting scanned documents etc. into a database and moving a computer mouse over a box to place a check mark saying a document was presented is not physical verification.

Nobody has shown me any kind of quality control/verification type sampling of people physically verifying residences etc. I'm not saying it doesn't exist but I sure have never heard a thing about it. The in person registration is not what I'm speaking of as being a problem. In this age of computer manipulation social media sites have shown us how many tens of thousands of phony accounts can appear almost instantly all with a seemingly different IP address etc. So we're mostly left with people verifying by having one database check with another like DMV etc. I have no doubt in my mind that crooked people like a Roger Stone or a Steve Bannon would try to develop a way to game the online registration system. So if they find a way to game the "pass/fail" points in the on-line registration process they could then move to gaming early voting/absentee aspects. Again how large or small of an effect it would have we simply would be using conjecture at this point.

But to think that they have been only spending their billions around the world on figuring out who to send an e-mail to for fundraising or who to receive which phony article on a social media site is being naive about these things. Also the people like the fellow mentioned in the OP could sit you down at a computer and in less than 5 minutes show you enough things that can be and are done with and to computers that would make many people rethink the whole "being on-line" way of living.

So I don't reject out of hand people raising questions and proposing that we investigate and determine facts. Will it be done? I doubt it. I believe that people are basically going to go along and "hope" "somebody" will stop the lunatic if he goes too far. Doesn't sound to me like anything beyond "wishing and hoping" rather than a clear strategy with steps laid out and planning for contingencies etc. People also chant the mantra of "we need to look forward" and that is fine but it is foolish to "go forward" and push on unless you also find out where you've been and what put you in the ditch and how it came about.

[dlilafae]

5. Nope

Not nonsense. I have stopped taking a criminal's benefit at face value.

[FBaggins]

6. "Nonsense" was the polite word for it

You aren't taking Trump's word for anything. You're taking the word of the tens of thousands of loyal democrats who work those polling places and know how the process works.

Over someone with no credibility that you've never heard of before - who has made the same kinds of allegations in the past without any validity - who makes up facts out of whole cloth (like this ridiculously east-to-disprove "bullet ballot" BS).

[Babajida]

22. You don't think it's odd

that trump won ALL the swing states, even one's where the majority of down ballot votes went to Democrats, when he didn't even get 50% of the popular vote? When the enthusiasm for Harris was very evident and she outweighed him in both donations and rally attendance? You don't think it's at least worth looking into?

[FBaggins]

25. Nope. It was in fact predicted

There were seven "swing" states, but even in the projections that said "50/50" (e.g., 538) still had the two most likely outcomes being that Trump wins all seven or that Harris wins all seven.

In fact - I'd say just the opposite. The nation as a whole shifted more than six points toward Trump. Yet the swing states only shifted by about two points. Why isn't that evidence that Harris cheated and it just wasn't enough?

You don't think it's at least worth looking into?

The ridiculous thing here is that anyone thinks nobody is looking at the election. The normal election processes involve random audits of precincts. Every election includes dozens of smaller recounts. Heck - just the normal canvassing process would catch the types of nonsense these CTs are speculating about. Nobody needs to request a "hand recount of all swing states" to know that the results were legit.

[ConcernedCitizen1776]

8. Steven Spoonamore on The Thom Hartmann Program Live (11/18/2024) - 02:16:30 - 02:28:45

Steven Spoonamore on The Thom Hartmann Program Live (11/18/2024) - 02:16:30 - 02:28:45 -

The Steven Spoonamore interview starts at approx. 02:16:30 to 02:28:45. [link:https://www.youtube.com/live/5s4iCxtf_Js

https://www.youtube.com/@thomhartmann/videos - https://www.thomhartmann.com/

Stephen Spoonamore - Duty to Warn Letter - to VP Harris - Re: Election 2024 - Nov 15, 2024 - https://substack.com/home/post/p-151721941
________________________________________
November 15, 2024
Honorable VP Kamala Harris
The White House
Office of the Vice President
1600 Pennsylvania Ave
Washington DC 20500
Dear Madam Vice President.
This is my second Duty to Warn Letter regarding hacking of the 2024 Presidential Election. The first letter on November 7 was directed to Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Officials. Both warnings are made per DNI Clapper’s 2015 directive to all agencies and contractors associated with intelligence and financial agency technologies to warn of suspicions of hacking.
Professionally I have worked as the CEO or CTO at seven high technology firms including two which specialized in hacking and counter-hacking operations. My clients have included numerous governments DoD, DHS, Dept. of State, F100 Financials and F500 Industrials.
I am a lifelong Republican who has long placed service and participatory democracy over party. In government, I have twice been invited to SoCom to give lectures on electronic warfare and techniques to find terrorist money laundering and gave a keynote speech of the National Counterintel Summit on this same topic. I served as an after-action reviewer of communications and data failures on 9/11 under the direction of Jim Woolsey and FDNY Commissioner Scopetta, and later co-wrote multiple hacking risk analysis of Smart Grid technologies for the Obama administration.
You should reverse your concession, call for both a full investigation of criminal activity and demand hand recounts in all seven swing states.
In my professional view there are multiple and extremely clear indications the Presidential vote was willfully compromised.
I wholly agree with the public letter of Duncan Buell, et. al. of Nov. 13th stating they believe there is a possibility of hacking and calling for hand-recounts.
https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324.pdf
This letter’s clear call to action is commendable, but its cautious tone may belie the severity of what I believe has happened. In my view it is a near certainty the results have been changed at a scale which reversed the US Presidential Election. They imply there is a chance a hand-recount will show you won more votes. I am stating a hand recount will most likely show you did win. Both letters call on you to act.
In my view, a capable and skilled series of exploits, electronic tools and hacks were used to change the Presidential vote in all seven swing states. These activities have reversed the outcomes in at least Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. I will lay out the basics of the attack, starting with unusual elements within the results. I will then outline two processes which could have been followed to insert these false results into the system. Finally I will outline how I would recommend investigating.
Unusual elements within the results.
The results of the attack are improbable in the extreme and well tailored to the sole benefit of your opponent.
Approximately 600,000 votes are for Donald Trump but with no down ballot choices. These are either inserted “bullet ballots” for the Presidential race or manipulated data fields. They are surgically added to totals in limited jurisdictions and within only the seven swing States. This historically unprecedented set of numbers found in the 2024 swing states is absent in every other state. In AZ, MI, NC and WI the effect of these drop-off votes reverses the voters' will and even more improbably always pushes the winning margin beyond the mandatory recount numbers. It is a result too perfect for belief. It is a bespoke and programmed outcome. In other states including PA and NV, removing these strange and bespoke added votes, it appears Donald Trump may have won the cast votes but within a margin which would force recounts. The inserted votes raise his totals, to avoid any scrutiny during mandatory recount results which would have slowed his claim on the Presidency. In GA and FL the same pattern exists with unclear impact on the results.
This attack is not technically difficult. It is modest in scale. It would require:
Modest and common computer programming skills.
Access to 10-100 tabulators or to the handful of facilities programming them in advance.
A credible database of voter IDs of non-voters around which to create false ballots.
Perhaps as few as 1, but more likely 3-5 human program managers.
Access to eBollBook Data during the election to determine who had not voted.
(Possibly) Human access to some tabulators during counting.
If I was asked to lead this hack, I would expect to have a core team of 6-10 people, and operating costs under $10M with a timeline of 3-12 months.
The tell: A historically absurd number of Trump-only bullet ballots or undervote ballots.
There are always a handful of voters who cast a vote in one race which they care about, and do not make other selections on the ballot. These are called bullet ballots. In Presidential Races since 1980, these bullet ballots rarely account for more than 1% of the total votes including in Mr. Trump’s winning 2016 election and losing 2020 election, and when they do it warrants further investigation. In 2024 in the 43 non-swing states, bullet ballots make up a nominal >1%. In the seven swing states the numbers are so high to be unbelievable, unprecedented and demanding of further investigation. Here is analysis from totals as of late Nov. 12th
Here are the unprecedented results of drop-offs in the two western swing states:
AZ - 123K+ 7.2%+ of Trump’s total vote. Enough to reverse the outcome.
NV - 43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump’s total vote. Enough to exceed recount threshold.
It is my belief these two states have illegally added votes.
For comparison, examine Trump’s 2024 results in three states which border AZ and NV. They have equally passionate Trump supporters, but have the normal levels of drop off or bullet ballots.
ID

[EdmondDantes_]

9. It's kind of slick how he uses two different stats

As if they were the same. Not particularly intellectually honest though.

Saying that bullet ballots usually make up I assume he means about 1% (>1% would mean greater than 1%) but then immediately shifting to what percentage of Trump votes were bullet ballots as if that's the same thing.

Then there's the question of how he knows the results of secret ballots. And why this covert team of hackers didn't think that it would be helpful to give Trump bigger congressional majorities.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

17. Yep

Unless he has examined the physical ballots, he has no way of knowing how many bullet ballots were for Trump.

[Think. Again.]

27. I agree! Hand recounts are needed! Soon!

[SickOfTheOnePct]

30. That's where we part ways

Spoony has put up demonstrably wrong numbers, on purpose, and I see zero reason to waste money on counting ballots when nothing will change.

[Think. Again.]

32. Money? You're concerned about wasting money but not about losing our country...

...to NAZIS????

[SickOfTheOnePct]

34. Wasting money

When it’s clear who won is still wasting money, and I see no point. Add to that the fact that such ridiculous conspiracy theories are reminiscent of the Republicans in 2020, and I’ll say no thanks.

[Think. Again.]

35. There are legitimate reasons to double-check the results....

...whether you want them double-checked or not.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

37. Care to share?

Because I’ve yet to see a legitimate reason.

[DeeDeeNY]

11. What I find hard to understand is -

With all their resources in place, why weren't Democrats searching for this type of hack before the election? Did Spoonamore come forward to offer his information to the Democrats then? Musk and his money didn't get really involved until fairly close to the election so it would have been difficult for him to fund such an operation much in advance, and if the GOP was involved in any way, all that would be needed was one person out of many hundreds to get pangs of conscience and say something.
On the other hand, in 2020 there were three hand recounts of Georgia votes, so requesting hand recounts by Democrats should not be considered a big deal. Also, Putin has made statements that Trump "owes" him for this election, and in the month before the election, Trump did keep alluding to a secret "surprise" coming up.

[FBaggins]

12. Assumes facts not in evidence

Dems were watching for something like this. It simply didn’t happen

[LiberaBlueDem]

14. recounts can prove you correct

you do want to know how our votes are counted?

[FBaggins]

18. The normal election process has already proved me correct

Please don't confuse your not understanding how our votes are counted with a generalized ignorance of the process on the part of everyone else.

[LiberaBlueDem]

19. i understand

you don't want to admit computers can be hacked

[FBaggins]

23. That's the crux of his error

Computers can be hacked... but the hacks he speculates on could not defeat the normal election verification/canvass/audit processes.

[Think. Again.]

28. (Pssssttt... That's why we need vigorous recounts)

The "normal" verification/canvass/audit processes would not catch the hacking that he explained.

[FBaggins]

29. Sorry - He hasn't the first clue how those work

His conspiracy theory doesn't even try to explain how it would get past the normal processes.

He speculates about a handful of hackers controlling the tabulation machines at the county level - without even dealing with the fact that all that does is adust the numbers reported on election day. There would be no way to get past the fact that hundred of precincts in each county have their own counts (that the tabulation is just adding up)... there would be no way to hide hundreds of thousands of changed votes when anyone at any precinct can see what the county reports for their precinct... and it wouldn't match. The total on the counting machine at the precinct has to match what the county reports... which has to match the number of ballots in the machine... which has to match the number of ballots handed out at the precinct... which has to match the number of signatures in the ballot books in the precincts... all done in plain sight of members of both parties.

He speculates about a handful of hackers - yet there were scores of precincts in thousands of counties around the country that saw shifts toward Trump over the last election. In most of those cases the shift was larger than in the states that made the difference.

It simply isn't possible. Which is why all of the elections experts agree and the only people on the other side are this nutjob who claimed the same thing in 2004 and then claimed a republican elections expert was killed for it in 2008 and it back with his pipe dream yet again.

[Think. Again.]

31. Listen, I have no idea what your technical training and experience is...

...but he has been correct about election hacking in the past, and with so much at stake, I agree with his call to be as cautious as we possibly can.

[FBaggins]

36. You have no idea what HIS technical training and experience are

and he has NOT been correct about election hacking in the past.

But the party has hundreds of actual experts in the field.

Just because you only pay attention once every four years does not mean that there aren't experts out there... and they're all telling you that this guy is a nutjob who hasn't the first clue what he's talking about.

[Think. Again.]

38. He has been correct in the past and no one listened then either.

And please don't make things up, no "experts" have told me anything about this guy, I've only discussed this with some internet randos.

[DiamondShark]

39. internet randos

[lees1975]

20. Checking the numbers does not imply lack of a peaceful transfer of power.

Unless we find the election was stolen. I do not put that past the GOP. They've been way to noisy about it for this not to be the case.

[gab13by13]

26. Republicans hacked the vote in 2004

The programmer who diverted votes from Ohio to a watershed in Tennessee admitted it. Before he could testify in DC he was killed in a small plane crash.

Kerry really won the election.