Tip of a massive iceberg?

[apcalc]

Last edited Mon Dec 5, 2016, 11:40 AM - Edit history (2)

Election fraud?

http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/12/03/wisconsin-recount-officials-just-found-five-counting-machines-tampered-seals/

[FBaggins]

1. Not likely

If it had been a seal of ballots (something protecting against tampering of ballots or "stuffing"of the box, that would be one thing... But a manufacturer's seal? That doesn't appear to be related to the vote.

[magicarpet]

4. Broken seals on electronic voting machines raise questions of tampering

~ Was a program inserted or the equipment re-programed to miscount the actual intended vote to favor a specific candidate ?

~ Were the internal workings tampered with to throw off the vote count total but untraceable ?

~ Were the tabulated votes adjusted or erased so the final vote count favors a specific candidate ?

A seal customarily indicates the machine has been tested, calibrated, and witnessed to work and function properly just before it is placed into service for an election. The seal assures the internal workings were not tampered with - a broken seal means someone accessed the internal workings of the electronic voting machine and signals a flashing red neon light that tampering with a free and fair election count was the intent of breaking the seal open.

Breaking and entering an electronic voting machine does not portend a free and fair election. The broken seal alerts you to that reality - or should.

[FBaggins]

7. Only if they're seals related to the vote... not the warranty on the machine.

A seal customarily indicates the machine has been tested, calibrated, and witnessed to work and function properly just before it is placed into service for an election.

Right... but not seals of the type shown in the photos. This wasn't a seal placed by county or state elections officials.

signals a flashing red neon light that tampering with a free and fair election count was the intent of breaking the seal open.

Note really... because that type of tampering wouldn't be consistent from one machine to the next... and only a small subset of the machines used on election day are used in the recount. It would stick out like a sore thump when one tainted machine counted dozens (even hundreds) of stacks of ballots and kept coming up with different results than on election day.

[FBaggins]

8. From Snopes

FALSE

http://www.snopes.com/wisconsin-recount-observers-find-voting-machines-broken-seals/

Here’s our statement on St. Croix County voting equipment questions:

Questions have been raised by some recount observers in St. Croix County about the security of voting equipment. The Wisconsin Elections Commission has been in contact with the St. Croix County Clerk and the equipment manufacturer, Elections Systems & Software (ES&S), and is confident that this is not an issue that would have affected the accuracy of the results reported by the equipment.

St. Croix County municipalities use DS200 scanners from ES&S. After the equipment was purchased, ES&S sent out a technician to install modems in the scanners, which are used on Election Night to transmit unofficial results to the county. In order install a modem, the technician was required to break a “warranty seal” on a door on the scanner. Unfortunately, the technician apparently did not replace those seals on the doors after completing his work.

According to Gary Jacobsen, Regional Field Service Manager for ES&S: “These are warranty seals used by technicians and should not be confused with “security seals” that the County would have used on Election Day. To gain access to the inner workings of the scanner, the technician uses a T-10 Torx screwdriver that has a security tip that is needed because of the special screws that are used.”

ES&S will produce an affidavit from the technician attesting to the fact that he was the person who broke the seals and why he did so. The Commission has asked the St. Croix County Clerk to provide a copy of that document after it has been completed. Also, the equipment will be tested following the recount.

The County Clerk reports that observers from the Stein campaign have been verifying the equipment’s accuracy for selected reporting units by observing the ballots after they are tabulated by the equipment with the broken warranty seals. They have the scanners set up on tables (without the ballot bin) so that every ballot processed by the machine slides out on the table for observers to see and count without handling the ballots. They are not doing this for every reporting unit recounted on each of the machines in question, but have verified several and all of the hand count tallies match the results tape generated by the scanner.

Based on the evidence provided by the St. Croix County Clerk’s office and ES&S, the Commission staff is confident that the voting equipment is accurately tabulating and reporting the results in St. Croix County.

[apcalc]

10. Thks!

[magicarpet]

11. Break a security seal - then document entry to it as to who/why/wherefor - .......

.....then install a new witnessed security seal to all panels/doors/internal access points that could be used to tamper with the accurate counting of the electronic voting equipment to assure a free and fair election.

~~~~~~~

As stated in previous (fbaggins #8) comment above:

St. Croix County municipalities use DS200 scanners from ES&S. After the equipment was purchased, ES&S sent out a technician to install modems in the scanners, which are used on Election Night to transmit unofficial results to the county. In order install a modem, the technician was required to break a “warranty seal” on a door on the scanner.

Unfortunately, the technician apparently did not replace those seals on the doors after completing his work.

(snip) ~ end previous comment above.

~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~

Unless theses security seals are in place and properly recorded as to being intact at each and every step upon the way - up to the date of voting and beyond - seals being properly intact upon a recount and possible internal workings recount inspection - absent unbroken security seals - the chain of custody is faulty/potentially open to contamination of the integrity of the electronic voting equipment and its ability to accurately count and tabulate the votes with any confidence manipulation or tampering or molestation of the vote did not take place.

It matters not what St. Croix County Election Administrators or what the ES&S modem installation technician is willing to swear and attest to. Once the "Warranty"/Security Seal was broken to gain entry access - the access was not properly documented - and new security seals were not re-installed and properly re-witnessed - the security door was needlessly left ajar for any future unwarranted entry to their pleasure to come and go at their free will - undetected - no matter how ill their intentions may have been.

This is banana republic voting - the citizens of the United States of America deserve and should demand better than that.

~~~~

Tampered seals on Wisconsin vote counting machines now being blamed on “modems”
By Bill Palmer | December 4, 2016

(snip) ~

In a familiar refrain which is growing all too tiresome, Wisconsin officials are once again blaming it all on “modems.”

(snip) ~

But what stands out is that this is the third separate instance of Wisconsin officials using modems to explain suspicious circumstances. Another recount observer in Kenosha County reports that officials are blaming modems. And last week, Palmer Report was the first to report that a Wisconsin elections official also blamed a “modem” error for incorrectly padding Donald Trump’s vote total in Sauk County.

The sheer number of instances in which Wisconsin elections officials are blaming “modems” for everything from tampered seals, to impossible vote totals, stands out as noteworthy in and of itself. While vote counting machines do in fact use modems to remotely pass along their totals, these modems are verging on becoming a too frequently used excuse. As the Wisconsin recount continues, election officials in the state may have some further explaining to do.

http://www.palmerreport.com/news/modems-tampered-seals-wisconsin-recount/374/

~~~~~

(snip) ~

Verified Voting, which describes itself as a “non-partisan non-profit organization” and has a Board of Directors which includes six people with Ph.D. doctorates, has an entire page of guidelines for those precincts using the ES&S DS200 vote counting machines. Halfway down the page, here’s what stands out:

“Ideally, the DS200’s exposed ports, memory card access areas, ballot box doors and case seams would be covered with tamper-evident security seals. The integrity of these seals should be maintained at all times, and only breached under controlled, explained circumstances. Seals should be logged to maintain chain of custody of sensitive materials.”

http://www.palmerreport.com/news/voting-integrity-wisconsin-broken-seals-machines/358/

[FBaggins]

12. The problem with your claim is right there in the title

That isn't a security seal. Security seals have serial numbers on them so that they can be logged each time they're applied or broken.

It was right there in the text. "these are warranty seals used by technicians and should not be confused with “security seals” that the County would have used on Election Day."

Just as importantly, Stein's observers have been able to watch as ballots are counted by the machines in question and have seen no errors. The machine count matches the stack of ballots and both matched what was reported on election day.

[cilla4progress]

2. I feel like if we can just raise enough doubt...

[magicarpet]

3. Not VOTER fraud - this is ELECTION fraud ......

Please be careful how you frame election improprieties - ELECTION fraud is perpetrated by the people who administer the election process to gain a fraudulent advantage over the election results - VOTER fraud is perpetrated by single individual voters who attempt to fraudulently skew election results in favor of their chosen candidate. The later is extremely rare the former much more common.

Republican's bogus claims of voter fraud bring us laws/rules for stringent voter identification prior to being able to vote - bogus cross check data bases - bogus felon list data bases - curtailment of early voting - and a myriad of other methods to disenfranchise elderly - minority - college student voters who would likely vote for the Democratic candidate. With the explicit purpose of intentionally denying/curtailing/and - or hampering people of liberal/progressive/ political leanings from their rights to vote.

Do not misconstrue ELECTION fraud for VOTER fraud you feed and perpetuate the Republican/ultra-conservative theme that liberally inclined voters conspire to fraudulently tamper with election results. In actuality VOTER fraud is minor and minuscule and a very rare occurrence. Stringent rules against voter fraud are a ruse to disenfranchise likely Democratic voters ability to cast their ballot and prevent their votes from being counted thus enhancing the vote count of the Republican/Conservative candidates ability to "win"/take/steal election results.

[uponit7771]

5. +1

[magicarpet]

6. THX for the edit APCALC - an important distinction (NT)

Last edited Mon Dec 5, 2016, 06:55 PM - Edit history (1)

[apcalc]

9. You bet! Realized right away! Thank you!