You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

notanartist ago

Yes - Clinton, Soros AND Omidyar - For some reason, Omidyar flies under the radar. He shouldn't. He's involved with USAid - donated $500,000 to USAid in Ukraine takeover. His companies, including Paypal and GoFundMe, have been instrumental in demonetizing "truthers." He owns ebay, and I wonder about a possible connection to "cheesebay." When he bought the Intercept, he bought the Snowden leaks. Obama named him a WH Fellow, and Omidyar visited the WH more times than Eric Schmidt. Omidyar was crucial to the US joining the OGP under Obama - and, believe me, that is a whole other subject that deserves "outing" - it's nothing more than a precursor to global governance IMHO.

ERIC is inter-operable - member states send required info to the ERIC team who then update it. They had the ability to create registrations - how would you even detect this without going through every registration and matching it with a certifiably "real" person? This is why, despite the convenience of online registration, the registration process needs to include the county clerk of a voter's precinct. They researched which states allowed total online registration and which ones required the online registration data to be sent to a county clerk who then sent a fom to the person registering to sign and return. States requiring the latter had little to no reports of unauthorized registration changes.

Why was Pew offering progressively larger incentives for states to join ERIC the closer it came to the election? Why were they funding the costs of mailing registration postcards to unregistered but eligible voters - and how many people likely to Republican received them?

Another thing about ERIC - one of the big tools for marketing it (especially to Republican incumbents) was its "state of the art" capability to remove deceased voters from the roles? Why then, did ERIC states (especially the early members) have some of the highest incidence of deceased voters?

If the post by Seth's friend is legitimate re: separate polling places and duplicate poll books, how would that fit into the strategy? Why would they need a separate place? Were they switching ballots of voters from other poll places? Were they creating registered voters who did not exist? Was the real purpose of "opening" the database to get Sander's supporter list, so they knew which ballots to intercept, and essentially use the Clinton technique of blaming someone else (Sanders campaign) for doing what Clinton team was doing? I find it difficult to believe that Seth would have opened the database if he knew what was going on.

Yes, they coordinated the info - they knew what kind of car they owned, if they were receiving government benefits, who their friends were - basically all the metadata Google collects. They could predict very accurately, I'd assume.