Published On: Fri, Jul 8th, 2016

Ballots With Sanders Votes Covered with White-Out Filmed by Election Monitors in San Diego

Checkbox next to Bernie Sanders' name, third choice down from top, covered over with white-out, along with first part of word "Bernie."
Checkbox next to Bernie Sanders’ name, third choice down from top, covered over with white-out, along with first part of word “Bernie.” | Source

Citizen election monitors in San Diego have captured film of ballots which have been tampered with, with white-out erasing only Sanders votes, sometimes with part of Bernie Sanders’ first name obscured as well. In the video, a monitor reports that almost half the ballots in the box of ballots she witnessed had been so altered, always against Sanders. She says the box she witnessed contained about 300 ballots, and that it was only one of many counting stations she could not witness.

San Diego is the second largest county in California, a state crucial to Sanders in narrowing the pledged delegate gap with Hillary Clinton.

The mainstream media has yet to report on the startling discovery.

After the Illinois Democratic primary in March, a citizens’ watchdog group monitoring an audit of the votes says they witnessed vote totals being tampered with to benefit Hillary Clinton.

In other video captured by citizen reporters and election monitors in San Diego, an election official attempts to keep monitors away from the windows of a room where “provisional” ballots are being counted by officials, which are ballots which were cast mostly by independent voters in the primary. At one point an election monitor, a woman, is told by an official who identifies herself as “Karen Mayer,” to keep her voice down, as she questions what officials through the glass in an off-limits room are doing in the back. The woman tells the official that “you guys are violating the election code, and I’m not going to shut up about it.”

In a follow up interview of another official, “Charlie Loomis,” who identifies himself as an IT manager, confirms that it is indeed white-out that can be seen on the ballots, and that the ballots are being “manipulated.” The IT manager goes on to say that, as a San Diego official, he has no control over this, as the white-outs are a result of Democratic party rules on how the ballots, which are provisional ballots, must be processed. Mr. Loomis say he has “nothing to do with” those rules. Mr. Loomis did indicate, however, that after the white-out process, the ballots are “run through the scanner again.”

Citizen election monitors filmed ballots with Sanders votes whited out

San Diego activist asking what election workers are doing in back of glassed-in room.
San Diego activist asking what election workers are doing in back of glassed-in room. | Source

In a third video taken by the activists, one says that she had found out from officials that in the case of University of San Diego, a Sanders stronghold with 34,000 students, any provisional ballot without a student’s room number was sent to a shredder, without being scanned or in any way recorded. Official student mailing addresses at UCSD are a mailbox at 9450 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, the student mail center.

The extraordinary citizen reporting in San Diego caps an extraordinarily contentious Democratic primary season, in which election analysts have contended that Bernie Sanders actually won, or did better than officially reported, in many critical states. Sanders rallies topped 30,000 and 40,000 people, filling stadiums, while it was noted that Hillary’s Clinton’s crowds frequently did not fill high school auditoriums.

Clinton supporters have met every contention of fraud with dismissal that such allegations are “CT,” for “conspiracy theories.”

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla, an open Hillary Clinton supporter who headlined a fundraiser for Clinton in Riverside on May 21st, has been sued, before and after the primary, for presiding over an election in which many independent voters were given the wrong instructions. Another lawsuit has just been filed asking the court to halt the impending certification of the primary election results for Clinton until all the ballots are counted and questions answered.

Due to citizen pressure, provisional ballots continue to be counted in California and have so far tipped the counties of Glenn, San Bernardino, and San Luis Obispo to Sanders.

In the HBO documentary “Hacking Democracy,” a demonstration shows how an optical ballot scanner can be secretly, and easily, tampered with, to show vote totals which even election officials are unaware have been tampered with.

The mainstream media has published numerous denials that there has been any evidence of vote tampering on behalf of Clinton, even as incidents such as those witnessed in Illinois and San Diego have been ignored by the same media. Election integrity activists have raised issues with the Democratic primaries almost from the start, in the Iowa causes.

In Massachusetts, another key primary, election watchers have submitted that in districts in which ballots are counted by hand, Sanders won by an average of 17%, whereas in districts where ballots are counted by machine, Clinton won by just over one percent.

Other analysts studying exit polls contend there is strong evidence, warranting further investigation, that Sanders had in actuality done better, in some cases much better, than reported in the states of Texas, Mississippi, Ohio, Illinois, Connecticut, Virginia, West Virginia, Indiana, Michigan, Tennessee, and Massachusetts.

A recent study performed by graduate students at Stanford University concluded that:

“data suggest that election fraud is occurring in the 2016 Democratic Party Presidential Primary election. This fraud has overwhelmingly benefited Secretary Clinton at the expense of Senator Sanders.”

Nevertheless, media coverage continues to treat the nomination of Hillary Clinton at the Democratic convention as inevitable. What is not clear is if Sanders forces will marshall challenges to the seating of Clinton delegates based on evidence of election fraud.

Criminal election fraud is defined in the US laws and is subject to investigation by the US Department of Justice. A 2012 US Department of Justice directive to the Department’s “Criminal Division and the Department’s 94 U.S. Attorneys’ Offices,” states that:

“The Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section and the Department’s 94 U.S. Attorneys’ Offices are responsible for enforcing the federal criminal laws that prohibit various forms of election fraud, such as vote buying, multiple voting, submission of fraudulent ballots or registrations, destruction of ballots or registrations, alteration of votes and malfeasance by election officials…”

The federal government asserts jurisdiction over election fraud taking place both in primaries and general elections, citing US Supreme Court precedent which:

“recognized that primary elections are an integral part of the process by which candidates are elected to office.”

Lawsuits challenging Clinton’s claim to pledged delegates having been filed in California, New York, Arizona, Illinois, and Massachusetts, and official investigations into voter suppression tactics have been announced in New York,Arizona, and Kentucky.

Full video of Chicago Election Board meeting, citizen monitor testimony


Leave a comment

You must be Logged in to post comment.