A major lawsuit is on the precipice of being filed by the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity, the implications of which could dramatically alter the landscape of the 2016 U.S. presidential race.
The group claims that in about eleven states, there has been noted a significant difference between the exit polls and the electronic vote totals presented on the morning after the primaries. These differences show votes appear to be shifted from Bernie Sanders to Hillary Clinton. The chances of this kind of shift happening are considered to be statistically impossible between Tuesday night and Wednesday morning in these eleven states. See the chart below.
“We are going to be filing a racketeering lawsuit under the Ohio Racketeering law, the strongest in the country and we can bring in every state, our RICO statute is coextensive with the federal RICO statute… So they’re nailed,” said Cliff Arnebeck.
Arnebeck, an election lawyer, got his J.D. from Harvard and is the chair of the Legal Affairs Committee of Common Cause Ohio and a national co-chair and attorney for the Alliance of Democracy. He will be joined by Bob Fitrakis, an election lawyer and political science professor, as co-counsel.
Computer security expert Stephen Spoonamore, who worked with Arnebeck onexposing GOP election fraud in Ohio has noted that when exit poll data varies more than 2% from electronic vote totals, the electronic vote totals are questionable.
In fact, 2% is the boundary by the US government when determining whether an election in another country has possibly been stolen. Please notice the exit poll differences in the 2016 DNC primaries listed above are significantly more than 2%. These differences point to questionable results for the electronic vote totals and likely electronic vote switching.
“This is not a Republican-Democrat issue, this is not a partisan issue, this is a Democracy issue, if you actually care about a Constitutional democracy in which each person votes, that vote is validated and the people who end up in office are reflected on the basis of the way people voted you care about this issue,” said Spoonamore.
According to the Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity:
IMPORTANT NOTE: Although we have taken note of the shift here from Sanders to Clinton, we are NOT in any way stating who has done the shifting. WE DO NOT KNOW WHO HAS DONE THE SHIFTING OF THE ELECTRONIC VOTE TOTALS. This situation has galvanized three organizations, The Institute for American Democracy and Election Integrity (ADE) , the Columbus Institute of Contemporary Journalism, and Democracy Counts to set up our own exit polls and audits to track apparent election results in California.
Richard Charnin, a mathematician and statistician and author of the book, Matrix of Deceit, has been reporting on the apparent shifting of electronic vote totals and the non-release of raw data from Edison since 2004. Richard Charnin, well-known for what he calls the “Red Shift” which has been a shift between exit polls and electronic vote total differences of about 4-5% each year. This constitutes a shift to the political right. Although he is unable to analyze the raw data, he has been able to get screen shots of what the exit polls showed minutes before all of the electronic votes have been totaled since 2004.
In 2004, when Edison Research initially got exit poll data that said that Kerry was winning and Bush was losing at 9pm on election night and that the reverse was true shortly after midnight, Edison Research made a choice to “adjust” the raw data after that time so that it would match the electronic voting machine totals. Edison Research definitely wanted to keep being hired by the Media Consortium which proposes to tell viewers the true election results but which also chooses to trust electronic voting machine data. That was the last time that the American public has been able to see raw exit poll data.
Unfortunately this year, substantial exit poll differences have been noted in the US primary. In this year’s primary, the Red Shift appears to have become the “Clinton Shift”.
Arnebeck was the lead attorney, with Fitrakis as his co-counsel in the King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell case, which exposed electronic vote rigging in Ohio’s 2004 presidential race. During the lawsuit, a very revealing deposition of Michael Connell, head IT guru for the Bush family and Karl Rove, provided insight into how the election fraud conspiracy operated.
According to a report by Truth-out:
Connell served as the IT guru for the Bush family and Karl Rove. Connell ran the private IT firm GovTech that created the controversial system that transferred Ohio’s vote count late on election night 2004 to a partisan Republican server site in Chattanooga, Tennessee owned by SmarTech. That is when the vote shift happened, not predicted by the exit polls, that led to Bush’s unexpected victory. Connell died a month and a half after giving this deposition in a suspicious small plane crash.
One can clearly see how deep the rabbit hole goes, as the one person who could implicate the actual individuals responsible for the election fraud conspiracy happens to have an “accident” that kills him. Essentially the investigation could go no further upon the suspicious death of Connell, thus protecting those behind the conspiracy.
Given these facts, it’s apparent that Arnebeck and his team are the real deal, and have experience in bringing a major legal action involving voter fraud and electronic vote rigging/switching.
Initially, the new lawsuit was to be filed on June 6, as stated in the video release announcing the results of their investigation, but the filing was delayed due to ADE wanting to include data from California’s primary, which was held on June 7.
Suspiciously, the Media Consortium and Edison Research, which control election polling, has now decided to cancel the remaining exit polls for the 2016 primaries. Many suspect these exit polls have been canceled because these exit poll differences could be used as an indicator of election fraud when contrasted with electronic voting totals.
“There is no way the Democratic Convention is going to nominate somebody on the basis of obviously stolen votes…the facts are coming out and that’s a fact…We are suing the media as being complicit in the crime. They are acting as accessories after the fact. They are covering up evidence of criminal activity, it’s a crime,” said Arnebeck.
In my opinion Hillary Clinton has been used for the purpose of scuttling Bernie Sanders campaign for president, she is being used…but they’ve been caught, it’s obvious, it’s just like Bernie Sanders when he talks about the system is rigged, ah the elections are rigged, the evidence is clear, everybody’s gonna see it and the game is over…Bernie has won in fact…”
The fact that electronic vote rigging is currently taking place, while the mainstream corporate media remains curiously silent, indicates a massive fraud being perpetrated on the American public. Make no mistake, had the vote been closer in the GOP primary the nomination would likely have been stolen from Trump in the same manner. This isn’t a partisan issue, but one that slashes across the political spectrum and should alarm every American.
The time has come to ask ourselves who is behind the stealing of U.S. elections, and maybe more importantly; why does nobody in a position of authority seem interested in finding out?
In the video below Arnebeck breaks down how they prevented the Ohio presidential race from being stolen in 2012 and explains exactly what is taking place in this election cycle.
Please share this crucial information with every person you know!