Since the beginning of the year, the political election process has exposed Americans to more corruption and vote rigging than at any time in their history. The allegations of fraud and vote-rigging even sparked the interest of several academic researchers who published a report on their findings earlier this month — what they discovered in their research is disturbing.
What the research shows is that Clinton’s sweeping victories could not have been possible — without fraud on a massive scale.
As Alexander Higgins reports, one of the statistical models applied by Stanford University researcher Rodolfo Cortes Barragan to a subset of the data found that the probability of the “huge discrepancies” of which “nearly all are in favor of Hillary Clinton by a huge margin” was “statistically impossible” and that “the probability of this happening was is 1 in 77 billion.”
According to Higgins report,
Analysis also showed repeatedly irregularities and statistically impossible reverses in reported live votes in several locations across the country.
In commenting on the research, Barragan stated that some of the models are rock solid and 59 years old and the results seen here have never been witnessed in non-fraudelent election during that time period.
To summarize, at least four different independent studies were conducted with various statistical models applied.
The researchers applied the different statistical models to:
- Actual vote counts as they were reported
- Discrepancies in polling data verse actual counts.
- Various subsets of demographic polling data verse actual vote counts
The results of each study corroborated the results of the others and some of the researchers have reviewed the work of the others and go onto to confirm the findings in those studies.
It will take months for the studies to undergo peer review.
However, all of their research statistically proved there must have been widespread fraud to create the discrepancies in the vote counts that exist in all 3 subsets of the data analyzed.
The research of Barragan, done collaboratively with Axel Geijsel of Tilburg University in The Netherlands, corroborates independent mathematical research conducted by Richard Charnin.
Further independent research was conducted by Beth Clarkson of Berkeley who also not only corroborated the two previous studies but reviewed them and after her research was done and confirmed their results.
Beginning in Iowa and eventually getting blown wide open in Arizona, the fraud and suppression of votes have let Americans know that their rulers are selected not elected.
Examples of this fraud were captured on video, documented on paper, and even broadcast live on television.
In Iowa, to break the supposed ties between Clinton and Sanders, the precincts held actual coin flips to decide this most crucial primary of the cycle. Clinton won all 6. However, the video below clearly shows Sanders winning at least one of those coin flips that was credited to Clinton.
As the primary moved to Nevada, another blatant act of election rigging was captured on video. As a poll worker tries to stop them from entering before they are registered, dozens of voters, wearing Clinton T-Shirts, walked right past the caucus registration booth to participate in the caucus. They never registered.
In March, Clinton brought in her husband to break the law for her, giving her an upper hand at polling sites during the Massachusetts primary.
Bill Clinton blatantly violated Massachusetts election law that states campaigning within 150 feet of a polling site on election day is a felony, as reported by KTAR News. Not only did Bill Clinton campaign well within 150 feet of multiple election sites during voting hours causing gridlock, he even entered polling sites, with his security detail effectively shutting down the voting while the former president was present.
Another dysfunctional disaster unfolded in Arizona which led to even more people waking up to the fraud. The election rigging was so obvious that a hearing was held the following week in the House Gallery to discuss possible courses of action to correct it.
In April, during that hearing on the election challenge, a Maricopa County poll worker testified the computer system she used to check in voters would not allow her to give the correct ballots to voters.
The testimony from Dianne Post confirmed the rampant voter suppression and election rigging which led to the hearing taking place. Post, who is an attorney in Maricopa County, testified a machine she was using to check in voters at a location failed to give 36 people the proper ballot.
It gets worse.
According to Post, another 22 people at her location were listed in the wrong party and their polling place ran out of ballots for at least two congressional districts.
“Every single time it happened to me it was a Democratic voter who wasn’t able to access a Democratic ballot,” she said.
Post was only one person in one station, the allegations of suppression spread throughout the state.
Sadly, it seems, that all of this evidence of fraud and rampant corruption is hardly enough to register as a blip on the establishment radar. In spite of the criminal evidence against her, the unscrupulous control Clinton illustrates over the media has allowed for and promoted her savior-like persona. Perhaps if Americans were more concerned with the rigged game of selecting their rulers than they are with the rigging of a basketball game — we may not find ourselves in such a despotic state.