Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.Clearly the Ds cheated in Detroit...but how come we don't see reports of this on the Lib MSM....yeah right.BREAKING: Voter Fraud In Michigan Favored Clinton – NOT Trump
LOL so do we get to arrest the people who helped Hillary lose by breaking election laws
Optical ballot scanners in Michigan that malfunctioned on election night and may have counted votes twice were situated in heavily Democratic areas, meaning that any vote fraud in the state actually favored Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump.
Good column on the D cheating....
Michigan Recount Exposes Clinton Electoral Fraud: Half of Detroit Votes Show Signs of Tampering
Votes in Hillary-heavy Detroit may have been counted up to 6 time
This is some next-level poetic justice: A Michigan recount backed by Jill Stein and the Democrats, and intended to delegitimize Trump’s astonishing victory on November 8, has actually exposed widespread fraud in precincts which voted heavily for Clinton.
Hillary even sucks at cheating. Via the Detroit News:
Michigan’s largest county voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, but officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts during a countywide canvass of vote results late last month.
Most of those are in heavily Democratic Detroit, where the number of ballots in precinct poll books did not match those of voting machine printout reports in 59 percent of precincts, 392 of 662.
In other words: In Democratic Detroit, each vote was counted 6 times!
Just imagine the landslide popular vote victory Trump would have enjoyed if the Democrats played fair on Election Day.
Y'all can keep trying to rewrite this story all week but nobody's buying. This is the same story that's been cited over and over and over and it doesn't demonstrate anything that can be called "fraud". This is a case of ten-year-old scanners that occasionally jammed and the jammed scans may or may not have tripped the counter, which then required human intervention to reset. As a result the total of all votes and the total votes cast did not match in these places, usually off by literally one or two votes. And no one knows which way they were off, plus or minus, and no one knows who the votes involved were for.
That is in no way how "fraud" works. Actual "fraud" is where somebody deliberately controls either extra votes for one candidate, or disappearing votes for another. Neither is the case here. And the key verb is "control" --- you cannot possibly have "accidental fraud".
Thus the only "fraud" is in your post itself i.e. that you're a dishonest lying hack. The question is, what exactly is the thinking of you intellectual knuckledraggers that you expect anyone is going to buy this fiction? Your publisher rejected you as your fiction wouldn't sell, so what gives you the impression that it could sell here? And the other question is --- why is it so important to y'all to make up this bullshit story especially when a simple read of the story shoots it down?
I read a couple of stories on it, and according to them, over 80 machines were malfunctioning on election night. I can't believe all 80 plus did so after the voting night started. They knew those machines didn't work correctly from the beginning.
That aside, if a machine is not acting properly, that machine should be shut down for the rest of the night, not allow it to keep counting votes inaccurately.
They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.Clearly the Ds cheated in Detroit...but how come we don't see reports of this on the Lib MSM....yeah right.BREAKING: Voter Fraud In Michigan Favored Clinton – NOT Trump
LOL so do we get to arrest the people who helped Hillary lose by breaking election laws
Optical ballot scanners in Michigan that malfunctioned on election night and may have counted votes twice were situated in heavily Democratic areas, meaning that any vote fraud in the state actually favored Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump.
Good column on the D cheating....
Michigan Recount Exposes Clinton Electoral Fraud: Half of Detroit Votes Show Signs of Tampering
Votes in Hillary-heavy Detroit may have been counted up to 6 time
This is some next-level poetic justice: A Michigan recount backed by Jill Stein and the Democrats, and intended to delegitimize Trump’s astonishing victory on November 8, has actually exposed widespread fraud in precincts which voted heavily for Clinton.
Hillary even sucks at cheating. Via the Detroit News:
Michigan’s largest county voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, but officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts during a countywide canvass of vote results late last month.
Most of those are in heavily Democratic Detroit, where the number of ballots in precinct poll books did not match those of voting machine printout reports in 59 percent of precincts, 392 of 662.
In other words: In Democratic Detroit, each vote was counted 6 times!
Just imagine the landslide popular vote victory Trump would have enjoyed if the Democrats played fair on Election Day.
Y'all can keep trying to rewrite this story all week but nobody's buying. This is the same story that's been cited over and over and over and it doesn't demonstrate anything that can be called "fraud". This is a case of ten-year-old scanners that occasionally jammed and the jammed scans may or may not have tripped the counter, which then required human intervention to reset. As a result the total of all votes and the total votes cast did not match in these places, usually off by literally one or two votes. And no one knows which way they were off, plus or minus, and no one knows who the votes involved were for.
That is in no way how "fraud" works. Actual "fraud" is where somebody deliberately controls either extra votes for one candidate, or disappearing votes for another. Neither is the case here. And the key verb is "control" --- you cannot possibly have "accidental fraud".
Thus the only "fraud" is in your post itself i.e. that you're a dishonest lying hack. The question is, what exactly is the thinking of you intellectual knuckledraggers that you expect anyone is going to buy this fiction? Your publisher rejected you as your fiction wouldn't sell, so what gives you the impression that it could sell here? And the other question is --- why is it so important to y'all to make up this bullshit story especially when a simple read of the story shoots it down?
I read a couple of stories on it, and according to them, over 80 machines were malfunctioning on election night. I can't believe all 80 plus did so after the voting night started. They knew those machines didn't work correctly from the beginning.
That aside, if a machine is not acting properly, that machine should be shut down for the rest of the night, not allow it to keep counting votes inaccurately.
Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.Clearly the Ds cheated in Detroit...but how come we don't see reports of this on the Lib MSM....yeah right.BREAKING: Voter Fraud In Michigan Favored Clinton – NOT Trump
LOL so do we get to arrest the people who helped Hillary lose by breaking election laws
Optical ballot scanners in Michigan that malfunctioned on election night and may have counted votes twice were situated in heavily Democratic areas, meaning that any vote fraud in the state actually favored Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump.
Good column on the D cheating....
Michigan Recount Exposes Clinton Electoral Fraud: Half of Detroit Votes Show Signs of Tampering
Votes in Hillary-heavy Detroit may have been counted up to 6 time
This is some next-level poetic justice: A Michigan recount backed by Jill Stein and the Democrats, and intended to delegitimize Trump’s astonishing victory on November 8, has actually exposed widespread fraud in precincts which voted heavily for Clinton.
Hillary even sucks at cheating. Via the Detroit News:
Michigan’s largest county voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, but officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts during a countywide canvass of vote results late last month.
Most of those are in heavily Democratic Detroit, where the number of ballots in precinct poll books did not match those of voting machine printout reports in 59 percent of precincts, 392 of 662.
In other words: In Democratic Detroit, each vote was counted 6 times!
Just imagine the landslide popular vote victory Trump would have enjoyed if the Democrats played fair on Election Day.
Y'all can keep trying to rewrite this story all week but nobody's buying. This is the same story that's been cited over and over and over and it doesn't demonstrate anything that can be called "fraud". This is a case of ten-year-old scanners that occasionally jammed and the jammed scans may or may not have tripped the counter, which then required human intervention to reset. As a result the total of all votes and the total votes cast did not match in these places, usually off by literally one or two votes. And no one knows which way they were off, plus or minus, and no one knows who the votes involved were for.
That is in no way how "fraud" works. Actual "fraud" is where somebody deliberately controls either extra votes for one candidate, or disappearing votes for another. Neither is the case here. And the key verb is "control" --- you cannot possibly have "accidental fraud".
Thus the only "fraud" is in your post itself i.e. that you're a dishonest lying hack. The question is, what exactly is the thinking of you intellectual knuckledraggers that you expect anyone is going to buy this fiction? Your publisher rejected you as your fiction wouldn't sell, so what gives you the impression that it could sell here? And the other question is --- why is it so important to y'all to make up this bullshit story especially when a simple read of the story shoots it down?
I read a couple of stories on it, and according to them, over 80 machines were malfunctioning on election night. I can't believe all 80 plus did so after the voting night started. They knew those machines didn't work correctly from the beginning.
That aside, if a machine is not acting properly, that machine should be shut down for the rest of the night, not allow it to keep counting votes inaccurately.
I read several stories where it said the vote count was off nearly 60% between the ballots and the computer readout on the machines. That sounds like more than one or two votes. Plus if anything, it would have had to favor Hil-Liar. Those machines were in areas that were 90% black.
Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.Clearly the Ds cheated in Detroit...but how come we don't see reports of this on the Lib MSM....yeah right.
Good column on the D cheating....
Michigan Recount Exposes Clinton Electoral Fraud: Half of Detroit Votes Show Signs of Tampering
Votes in Hillary-heavy Detroit may have been counted up to 6 time
This is some next-level poetic justice: A Michigan recount backed by Jill Stein and the Democrats, and intended to delegitimize Trump’s astonishing victory on November 8, has actually exposed widespread fraud in precincts which voted heavily for Clinton.
Hillary even sucks at cheating. Via the Detroit News:
Michigan’s largest county voted overwhelmingly for Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, but officials couldn’t reconcile vote totals for 610 of 1,680 precincts during a countywide canvass of vote results late last month.
Most of those are in heavily Democratic Detroit, where the number of ballots in precinct poll books did not match those of voting machine printout reports in 59 percent of precincts, 392 of 662.
In other words: In Democratic Detroit, each vote was counted 6 times!
Just imagine the landslide popular vote victory Trump would have enjoyed if the Democrats played fair on Election Day.
Y'all can keep trying to rewrite this story all week but nobody's buying. This is the same story that's been cited over and over and over and it doesn't demonstrate anything that can be called "fraud". This is a case of ten-year-old scanners that occasionally jammed and the jammed scans may or may not have tripped the counter, which then required human intervention to reset. As a result the total of all votes and the total votes cast did not match in these places, usually off by literally one or two votes. And no one knows which way they were off, plus or minus, and no one knows who the votes involved were for.
That is in no way how "fraud" works. Actual "fraud" is where somebody deliberately controls either extra votes for one candidate, or disappearing votes for another. Neither is the case here. And the key verb is "control" --- you cannot possibly have "accidental fraud".
Thus the only "fraud" is in your post itself i.e. that you're a dishonest lying hack. The question is, what exactly is the thinking of you intellectual knuckledraggers that you expect anyone is going to buy this fiction? Your publisher rejected you as your fiction wouldn't sell, so what gives you the impression that it could sell here? And the other question is --- why is it so important to y'all to make up this bullshit story especially when a simple read of the story shoots it down?
I read a couple of stories on it, and according to them, over 80 machines were malfunctioning on election night. I can't believe all 80 plus did so after the voting night started. They knew those machines didn't work correctly from the beginning.
That aside, if a machine is not acting properly, that machine should be shut down for the rest of the night, not allow it to keep counting votes inaccurately.
I read several stories where it said the vote count was off nearly 60% between the ballots and the computer readout on the machines. That sounds like more than one or two votes. Plus if anything, it would have had to favor Hil-Liar. Those machines were in areas that were 90% black.
Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.Y'all can keep trying to rewrite this story all week but nobody's buying. This is the same story that's been cited over and over and over and it doesn't demonstrate anything that can be called "fraud". This is a case of ten-year-old scanners that occasionally jammed and the jammed scans may or may not have tripped the counter, which then required human intervention to reset. As a result the total of all votes and the total votes cast did not match in these places, usually off by literally one or two votes. And no one knows which way they were off, plus or minus, and no one knows who the votes involved were for.
That is in no way how "fraud" works. Actual "fraud" is where somebody deliberately controls either extra votes for one candidate, or disappearing votes for another. Neither is the case here. And the key verb is "control" --- you cannot possibly have "accidental fraud".
Thus the only "fraud" is in your post itself i.e. that you're a dishonest lying hack. The question is, what exactly is the thinking of you intellectual knuckledraggers that you expect anyone is going to buy this fiction? Your publisher rejected you as your fiction wouldn't sell, so what gives you the impression that it could sell here? And the other question is --- why is it so important to y'all to make up this bullshit story especially when a simple read of the story shoots it down?
I read a couple of stories on it, and according to them, over 80 machines were malfunctioning on election night. I can't believe all 80 plus did so after the voting night started. They knew those machines didn't work correctly from the beginning.
That aside, if a machine is not acting properly, that machine should be shut down for the rest of the night, not allow it to keep counting votes inaccurately.
I read several stories where it said the vote count was off nearly 60% between the ballots and the computer readout on the machines. That sounds like more than one or two votes. Plus if anything, it would have had to favor Hil-Liar. Those machines were in areas that were 90% black.
Questions Arise About Trump Win After Officials Say Most Detroit Voting Machines Were Broken
Broken Voting Machines Could Wreak Havoc For Wayne County Recount
Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.I read a couple of stories on it, and according to them, over 80 machines were malfunctioning on election night. I can't believe all 80 plus did so after the voting night started. They knew those machines didn't work correctly from the beginning.
That aside, if a machine is not acting properly, that machine should be shut down for the rest of the night, not allow it to keep counting votes inaccurately.
I read several stories where it said the vote count was off nearly 60% between the ballots and the computer readout on the machines. That sounds like more than one or two votes. Plus if anything, it would have had to favor Hil-Liar. Those machines were in areas that were 90% black.
Questions Arise About Trump Win After Officials Say Most Detroit Voting Machines Were Broken
Broken Voting Machines Could Wreak Havoc For Wayne County Recount
I seen that. That is less likely fraud IMHO if most of those are (as reported) one or two ballots over. That is an honest mistake and bound to happen. I cannot find actual hard numbers though on all of the counties and if one or more has larger discrepancies then there is a real problem there.Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?They were not necessarily miscounting because there were poll workers there to clear the jam and ensure the count was correct. That is why many of those counties are off by a single vote or two - someone made a simple mistake. That will happen with tens of thousands of votes being cast.
I read several stories where it said the vote count was off nearly 60% between the ballots and the computer readout on the machines. That sounds like more than one or two votes. Plus if anything, it would have had to favor Hil-Liar. Those machines were in areas that were 90% black.
Questions Arise About Trump Win After Officials Say Most Detroit Voting Machines Were Broken
Broken Voting Machines Could Wreak Havoc For Wayne County Recount
My apologies. I read in a hurry as I was leaving to do something else.
It was nearly 60% of the places that were counted that found problems between the ballots and readouts, not 60% of discrepancies between the readout and ballots.
I seen that. That is less likely fraud IMHO if most of those are (as reported) one or two ballots over. That is an honest mistake and bound to happen. I cannot find actual hard numbers though on all of the counties and if one or more has larger discrepancies then there is a real problem there.Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?I read several stories where it said the vote count was off nearly 60% between the ballots and the computer readout on the machines. That sounds like more than one or two votes. Plus if anything, it would have had to favor Hil-Liar. Those machines were in areas that were 90% black.
Questions Arise About Trump Win After Officials Say Most Detroit Voting Machines Were Broken
Broken Voting Machines Could Wreak Havoc For Wayne County Recount
My apologies. I read in a hurry as I was leaving to do something else.
It was nearly 60% of the places that were counted that found problems between the ballots and readouts, not 60% of discrepancies between the readout and ballots.
There is nothing wrong with any machine, if Clinton had won no one would care, this is just another Clinton lieI seen that. That is less likely fraud IMHO if most of those are (as reported) one or two ballots over. That is an honest mistake and bound to happen. I cannot find actual hard numbers though on all of the counties and if one or more has larger discrepancies then there is a real problem there.Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?
Questions Arise About Trump Win After Officials Say Most Detroit Voting Machines Were Broken
Broken Voting Machines Could Wreak Havoc For Wayne County Recount
My apologies. I read in a hurry as I was leaving to do something else.
It was nearly 60% of the places that were counted that found problems between the ballots and readouts, not 60% of discrepancies between the readout and ballots.
I think there is a real problem if they are using machines they know didn't work properly. I can understand a machine here or a machine there, but they're talking over 80 machines.
I'm not familiar with their setup, but we only have two scanners at our voting place. 80 machine would cover 10 suburbs here.
That is the rub though. I do not know if they were working or not. At least in a capacity that was reasonable. In order to make that judgement I would have to have at least some info on the actual error rate of the machines themselves. The sources point out that many of the counties are only off by one or two. Out of tens of thousands that is noting at all and errors are a guarantee no matter what machines or processes are used. What I have not seen is how bad the worst of the offenders are. There may be something to the story or not.I seen that. That is less likely fraud IMHO if most of those are (as reported) one or two ballots over. That is an honest mistake and bound to happen. I cannot find actual hard numbers though on all of the counties and if one or more has larger discrepancies then there is a real problem there.Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.Numbers that far off do indeed look like fraud. Can you post a link to places that have that disparity?
Questions Arise About Trump Win After Officials Say Most Detroit Voting Machines Were Broken
Broken Voting Machines Could Wreak Havoc For Wayne County Recount
My apologies. I read in a hurry as I was leaving to do something else.
It was nearly 60% of the places that were counted that found problems between the ballots and readouts, not 60% of discrepancies between the readout and ballots.
I think there is a real problem if they are using machines they know didn't work properly. I can understand a machine here or a machine there, but they're talking over 80 machines.
I'm not familiar with their setup, but we only have two scanners at our voting place. 80 machine would cover 10 suburbs here.
That is the rub though. I do not know if they were working or not. At least in a capacity that was reasonable. In order to make that judgement I would have to have at least some info on the actual error rate of the machines themselves. The sources point out that many of the counties are only off by one or two. Out of tens of thousands that is noting at all and errors are a guarantee no matter what machines or processes are used. What I have not seen is how bad the worst of the offenders are. There may be something to the story or not.I seen that. That is less likely fraud IMHO if most of those are (as reported) one or two ballots over. That is an honest mistake and bound to happen. I cannot find actual hard numbers though on all of the counties and if one or more has larger discrepancies then there is a real problem there.Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.
My apologies. I read in a hurry as I was leaving to do something else.
It was nearly 60% of the places that were counted that found problems between the ballots and readouts, not 60% of discrepancies between the readout and ballots.
I think there is a real problem if they are using machines they know didn't work properly. I can understand a machine here or a machine there, but they're talking over 80 machines.
I'm not familiar with their setup, but we only have two scanners at our voting place. 80 machine would cover 10 suburbs here.
It certainly does not pass the smell test yet for me though as those number are not in the report when the 60% figure that you cited is. Where are the machines that were off by a lot of votes and how many of those are there?
theblaze.com??That is the rub though. I do not know if they were working or not. At least in a capacity that was reasonable. In order to make that judgement I would have to have at least some info on the actual error rate of the machines themselves. The sources point out that many of the counties are only off by one or two. Out of tens of thousands that is noting at all and errors are a guarantee no matter what machines or processes are used. What I have not seen is how bad the worst of the offenders are. There may be something to the story or not.I seen that. That is less likely fraud IMHO if most of those are (as reported) one or two ballots over. That is an honest mistake and bound to happen. I cannot find actual hard numbers though on all of the counties and if one or more has larger discrepancies then there is a real problem there.Neither of those links make any statement at all about the number of votes that are over the count. You claim that the ballot count was off 60% - something that is not corroborated with those links.
My apologies. I read in a hurry as I was leaving to do something else.
It was nearly 60% of the places that were counted that found problems between the ballots and readouts, not 60% of discrepancies between the readout and ballots.
I think there is a real problem if they are using machines they know didn't work properly. I can understand a machine here or a machine there, but they're talking over 80 machines.
I'm not familiar with their setup, but we only have two scanners at our voting place. 80 machine would cover 10 suburbs here.
It certainly does not pass the smell test yet for me though as those number are not in the report when the 60% figure that you cited is. Where are the machines that were off by a lot of votes and how many of those are there?
Here is what I found and there are other outlets reporting the same:
"Optical scanners in Wayne County show that 248 of the city’s 662 precincts counted over one third more ballots than the number of voters reported by poll workers. That totals 37 percent more voters than originally counted, and because of the statewide discrepancies, Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson sanctioned a state audit of the votes."
Voting machines recorded too many votes in over one third of Detroit’s precincts
At least to me, it sounds like more than a few votes here or a few votes there. They are talking hundreds if not thousands of votes.
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.
Optical scanners in Wayne County show that 248 of the city’s 662 precincts counted over one third more ballots than the number of voters reported by poll workers. That totals 37 percent more voters than originally counted, and because of the statewide discrepancies, Michigan Secretary of State Ruth Johnson sanctioned a state audit of the votes.
