The Election Hack No One Discusses

• March 2013, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper (who oversees all US intelligence agencies) denies to Congress that NSA intelligence officials collect data on Americans
• June 2013, Edward Snowden leaks confirm the DNI lied
• December 2014, Sony pictures is hacked and President Obama blames North Korea.
• July 2016, the television Vice channel series Cyberwar, the Sony hack, reveals other hackers could have done the hack using shared malware and fake IP addresses
• Sometime prior to their July 2016 Convention the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is hacked. The Dems “increasingly share the opinion” that the Russian government is behind the hack.
• August 1st 2016, former NSA employee in charge of their surveillance program after 911 asserts a disgruntled NSA employee probably hacked the DNC because of Hillary’s compromising of state secrets.
• August 2nd 2016, Donald Trump warns general election “is going to be rigged”
• August 3rd 2016, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson warns about state election systems being vulnerable to hacking.
• August 15th DHS offers to help state officials make their systems more secure
• August 17th 2016, an Electronic Privacy Information Center reports 32 of the 50 states would allow voting by insecure email, fax and internet portals in this election cycle.
• August 18th 2016, FBI warns state officials that hackers have targeted state election data systems. Probably two state voter registration systems affected (AZ, IL)
• August 27th 2016, outgoing Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid demands an investigation of Trump associations with Russia.
• September 6th 2016, Hillary Clinton implies to ABC that Russia will “tilt” the election through hacking
• September 16th 2016, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) offers to scan state voting systems ahead of the 2016 elections for security purposes to avoid hacking
o This help includes “Cyber hygiene scans on Internet-facing systems” and “Risk and vulnerability assessments”. This means the Obama/Democrat Administration will both remotely scan and conduct a 2-3 week on-site test of state election systems to detect vulnerabilities and recommend mitigations to prevent hacking
• September 28th 2016, 18 states ask DHS for help securing their voting systems
• October 19th 2016, during the Presidential debate Clinton states she will accept the outcome of the election but Trump says he wants to wait and see how it goes.
 Clinton also unequivocally asserts that 17 intelligence agencies all state the hacking of the DNC and her campaign was done by the Russians. While factually only the DNI (Clapper) and DHS (Johnson) Secretaries, both Obama appointees, have stated the hacks “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts”.
 Remember Clapper’s lie about collecting data on Americans, the July 2016 Sony hack and that DHS national cybersecurity experts are now knee deep in the state systems?
• November 4th 2016, DHS announces it is now “helping” 48 states protect their election systems. Warns of probable Russian interference.
• Future?
o November 8th, 2016
 The narrative has been laid, the lies have been told, the media has swallowed it hook line and sinker.
 Hillary Clinton wins.
• Were the state election systems hacked by the DHS? Did the Democratic Administration “experts” rig the voting system while they “helped” with their security review of the states? If hacks are found post-election who will they be blamed on? How will the public know the real truth? Will we trust answers from the new pathological liar President or the corrupt DOJ (Lynch) or the compromised FBI (Comey)? Are the lying DNI (Clapper) and DHS (Johnson) any more trusted?
 Donald Trump wins.
• Were the state election systems hacked? Do the Democrats blame Russia acting on behalf of “their friend” Donald Trump? Did he cut a deal with Putin? Will President Obama use election fraud argument to retain power until new elections are held? Or will the split Supreme Court decide, perhaps basing their decision on the least national turmoil? Or, due to a tie, toss the decision to the lower 4th Federal Court of Appeals that has been staffed by Obama over the last 7 years?
• Interesting times are ahead
• “The people who cast votes don’t decide an election, the people who count the votes do.” – Joseph Stalin

Lots of text there.

So what exactly is 'THE' election hack in your title?

Well said Doc.....
The entire American Electoral apparatus is not only compromised, but at total risk of further compromise by various actors both on stage and in the audience of this pathetic charade......

Political power comes from the barrel of a gun.....
Mao....

I think he means the compromise of the mechanical segment of the election....rather than the other political hacks...

a reply to: DrChandra

Nice compilation! Very convenient.

Now the question is: since DHS is clearly trying to be slippery dicks about the election, can outside sources still find ways to hack in and find the TRUE voting results from state to state?

Kind of like a citizens oversight committee? Because the people that take our taxes clearly aren't working for us.

a reply to: TommyD1966

The DHS installs a backdoor in the election system of the states while it does its "security reviews". These modern day Plumbers (ala Watergate) make sure the necessary state's report Hillary just barely winning. To avoid suspicion they don't throw states whose independent polls show wide margins between the candidates.

Notice the current DHS assurances that hackers will only be able to interfere with the reporting, news media, etc.. After all, they may need some time to pull off the hack so a cover story of a Russian DDOS interference on election day gives them the time they need.

If their covert manipulations can't hide a landslide by Trump the DHS will then reveal those backdoors as characteristic of and proof that Russia hacked in favor of Trump.

Last point, is this scenario all that implausible given the corrupt cabinet of this President?

Now, did you really need that explanation? I'm not a cyber expert and welcome any factual rebuttals that will get me off to another paranoid delusion.

a reply to: DrChandra

I think, assuming HRC wins POTUS, that what this means going forward is that approximately 45% of the US population is essentially disenfranchised in the sense that while they have no effective voice in the direction of the country or concerning the regulatory environment in which they live. About all they can do is continue to vote in local elections to vote in "obstructors" to Congress, but in reality they're fighting a losing battle of slow retreat.

The saddest part of this isn't this crappy election.............its the fact that the 45% are the ones who mostly supply the "meat" to the US Military establishment, only to say they're sons and daughters return home broken and often homeless in the service of the Democrat party. And I say Democrat party because in reality the "establishment" Republicans like the Bush family are really Democrats in "brown" suits.

We'll know the 45% have given up on this experiment when they quit flying the national flag and when the leaches of the recruiting services can no longer fill the ranks with corn fed farm boys and girls from fly-over country. And it can't happen too soon for me.

a reply to: DrChandra

Do you have sources? Or did you make this up?

a reply to: TonyS

I respect your right to have that opinion. But, I would submit that if she is LEGITIMATELY elected it does not show 45% is disenfranchised only that a majority of the people who turned out to vote are easily fooled. In my life I have seen the Democrats go from being perceived as a party representing the working class with traditional values to socialists who use identity politics to separate the country into special interests to whom they can pander.

Voting for "obstructers" is called democracy. It is not "all they can do" its the thing they do before they get violent. So, I hope we CAN continue to believe in our election process rather than view forced retreat as our only option.

The patriotism and subservience of our military is our last barrier to a real coup in this country. When Americans quit flying the flag the nation is gone. And recruiters have been suckering recruits with lies for 240+ years now.

Remember, those "meat" bags you disparage are the ones that man the wall against ambitious totalitarian regimes.

a reply to: Blueracer

I guess I should have documented every search used to confirm each fact I listed. I should not have assumed others see the same information I see. Stand by while I go get my footnotes together.

a reply to: DrChandra

I think you probably have an interesting story here. I would like to see your sources, as well, and encourage you to write this up in a story form.

I am also very interested in what I believe to be an ongoing-story of the hijacking of our election-systems (set-up by the two parties, thanks to the election debacle of 2000, in my mind). So I appreciate any attention others are giving to what could be a huge and very serious problem.

ETA: Keep in mind, too, that back in 2012...Anonymous claimed to have foiled a hacking plan by Karl Rove into the Republican primary. We have entered an era where we've allowed the security of our elections to be threatened by 'hacking' and manipulation of fear of 'hacking,' we are doing nothing to stop it.

To what end have we been led here?

a reply to: DrChandra

I guess my main beef with this is that it is incredibly right leaning.

We have proof of money flowibg back in forth between Trump and the russians. We have Trump on camera asking Russia to hack the DNC.

You seem to not have laid out a scenario where Hillary kegitimately wins the election, and in fact the Russians try to hack it and spin it in Trumps favor because it suits their agenda.

I give you credit for trying to be bi-partisan here... but the laguahe and viewpoints gave it away

a reply to: Lucidparadox

In 2000 & 2004, it certainly appeared that republicans were behind exploiting weaknesses in our election system to benefit in those elections. There were legitimate issues raised and GWB won, both elections.

Since then, however, there are further legitimate issues that have been raised. Issues that could explain millions of votes being manipulated thanks to hacking. And Obama won the last two elections, since then.

Whoever seems to benefit most when there are legitimate suspicions is the prime suspect, IMO. That's not an absolute, of course, but it is logical enough to consider seriously.

Some years the two parties want a Republican (Neo-con) to win, other years they want a Democrat (Neo-lib) to win. Right now, with the War on Terror declared, a Neo-con warhawk is of no use. That money-making scheme is in place. Neolibs will throw our tax dollars at corrupt domestic programs and still throw money at the War on Terror (or facilitate profit off-the-books).

We are only, just now, entering the age of truly result-changing 'hackable' elections...with Democrats benefitting most. It's logical they would get the most scrutiny.

But I believe both parties work hand-in-hand to set up election/voting problems to serve as catalysts for legislative reforms which make our election systems less & less secure.

Don't get hung up on partisan politics when talking about possible election/voter fraud. We all only get one vote and politicians of all stripes are cheaters.

a reply to: DrChandra

Good thoughts. BTW I wasn't disparaging those who serve by referring to them as meat bags, rather, I was disparaging the view of the military held by Democrat politicians that they are expendable "cannon fodder" to be used at their pleasure in the pursuit of their Globalist agenda.

The situation in the US rhymes with that in the UK as the Empire began to collapse. During and after WWI, the "Empire" military found it ever more difficult to recruit people to the military; I'd expect to see the same thing happen in the US before long. It could get interesting if they try to reinstate the draft, although I'd seriously doubt that would work.