Despite DHS Assurances the Votes Were not Changed There Has Been no Audit of the Results
The first question the GOP House wanted to ask Jeh Johnson-former Secretary of DHS-about was whether Russian hacking actually effected the voting results themselves. This is their way of trying to argue for his legitimacy.
It’s based on a flawed premise, to be sure. Even if actual voting totals were not altered, this doesn’t mean the election wasn’t compromised.
Honestly, the Comey letter itself delegitimizes the result as per Nate Silver it swung the election and the FBI Director isn’t supposed to decide the election.
Then you have all the leaks of DNC and Podesta’s emails while nothing on the Trump/GOP side and this is a tremendous advantage for Trump.
“When you consider he only won by 77,000 votes in three swing states it seems a more heroic assumption to assume it didn’t effect the result than that it did. But then you have the fact that Guccifer 2.0 also hacked voter information from the DNC and this was disseminated out to Roger Stone, Florida GOP operative Alan Nevins, and likely many GOP operatives across the country. Indeed, despite Mike Pompeo’s tough talk about Wikileaks now, he lauded their hacked emails at the time.”
So you don’t need to show the results themselves were manipulated to question Trump’s legitimacy. But as it happens it has not been proven that the results were not manipulated.
Homeland Security says that Russian hacking didn't change any actual votes—but they never audited the results. https://t.co/8uDaqKGm9E
— Harry Siegel (@harrysiegel) June 21, 2017
— MikeFarb (@mikefarb1) June 21, 2017
As the results weren’t audited, how do we know no actual votes were changed. The official version is that they tried but failed to do so. But at this point, who feels confident to take this on faith?
“Despite assurances from the U.S. intelligence community that Russian hacking only influenced the 2016 U.S. election—and didn’t change vote tallies—there was never actually a formal federal audit of those systems, the Department of Homeland Security said.”
And while DHS offered free security scans to any state that wanted them, many states—even ones that took up the DHS offer, like Michigan and Maine—either use audit procedures that are considered inadequate or don’t audit their election results at all.
“I think there’s a presumption amongst both the general public and lawmakers that DHS did some sort of investigation,” said Susan Greenhalgh, who serves as Elections Specialist at Verified Voting, a nonprofit devoted to U.S. election integrity.
“It didn’t happen. That doesn’t mean that something happened, but it also means it wasn’t investigated.”
That presumption is borne out of the certitude that officials have argued the results weren’t altered. As they are so certain, you have to assume there was an audit. How else would they be so certain? But turns out this assumption is wrong-there has been no audit. So where does this certainty come from?
Last night Rachel Maddow mentioned the hack of the Dallas County Web servers.
“Russian hackers took aim at Dallas County’s Web servers, possibly trying to access voter registration rolls, before the November presidential election, officials said Wednesday.”
“It’s unclear whether Russians targeted other Texas counties.”
“Collin and Tarrant county officials said they found no such attempts. Tarrant County scanned its system for the feds’ list of suspicious IP addresses but found no attempts, said Stephen Vickers, the county’s elections administrator.”
That was what Maddow pointed out-Collin and Tarrant county is Republican-Dallas is Democrat.
Speaking of discrepancies, we still have the discrepancies that the academics pointed to back in November-HRC did considerably worse in districts with electronic machines-beyond what you’d expect.
“Hillary Clinton is being urged by a group of prominent computer scientists and election lawyers to call for a recount in three swing states won by Donald Trump, New York has learned. The group, which includes voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz and J. Alex Halderman, the director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society, believes they’ve found persuasive evidence that results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania may have been manipulated or hacked. The group is so far not speaking on the record about their findings and is focused on lobbying the Clinton team in private.”
“Last Thursday, the activists held a conference call with Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and campaign general counsel Marc Elias to make their case, according to a source briefed on the call. The academics presented findings showing that in Wisconsin, Clinton received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots. Based on this statistical analysis, Clinton may have been denied as many as 30,000 votes; she lost Wisconsin by 27,000. While it’s important to note the group has not found proof of hacking or manipulation, they are arguing to the campaign that the suspicious pattern merits an independent review — especially in light of the fact that the Obama White House has accused the Russian government of hacking the Democratic National Committee.”
Well, of course, they didn’t have evidence. They’re computer scientists. For evidence we need an audit.
P.S. So the Gravis poll against Peter King NY2 and it has good news-almost too good to believe.
In my March poll I trailed King by 11 and thought that was very good news. Now Gravis has me up by 10? Still, the moment of truth is next week when Gravis writes up the press release.
I can use any help I can get at this point-volunteers or supporters who live in NY 2. Donations whatever your zip code. These days we can’t just support a local Dem we need a Dem Congress. Which is why I’ve donated few hundred to Jon Ossoff.
Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House-$5 or $10 can do so much.
If you feel that you can’t I, of course, understand-who is rich these days? But please do me one favor: ask yourself privately, mentally, if you really can’t spare $5 dollars. If you can honestly say you can’t, no worries.
We can have a Dem Congress, we must have a Dem Cogress, and we will.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will.