Comment by joatmon-snoo | Hacker News Reader

Comment by joatmon-snoo | Hacker News Reader

Is there anything floating out there beyond the article in New York[1] and everyone reiterating it?

The stuff over at Election Law Blog[2] seems to be worth quoting here:

> Without public evidence on the record to examine it is hard to really evaluate this claim other than by looking at the credibility of the people involved. Halderman is very credible, and if he says there are anomalies that deserve investigation, they should be investigated. But the fact that this group has gone to Elias and Podesta, and so far the campaign has said nothing since learning of it last Thursday, should give you pause. Time has just about run out. Claiming a hacked or rigged election is about as explosive a claim as one could make—-especially coming after Trump made unsupported allegations of vote rigging throughout the election. If there’s a realistic chance of anything here that could be proven to affect the election outcome, you have to trust Clinton’s legal team to advance it (or have advanced it already).

[1] http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/activists-urge-... [2] http://electionlawblog.org/?p=89454

> the campaign has said nothing since learning of it last Thursday, should give you pause

That's not surprising at all - anything less than an outright win fails to give Hillary anything positive & that ship has sailed.

If the real goal is effective governance for 4 years and not just "winning the race", then they might weigh the possible outcomes differently from an activist.

And there would be pressure from the current Whitehouse to just "move on, folks", which is unsurprising.

Well there is this and the retaliation over the email server she had running coupled with the fact she was caught lying in front of a Senate hearing on Benghazzi. I would say she did something smart for a change. I.e. facts vs. some wild claims... And with all the BS with past Florida elections coupled with Trump's claims of a rigged election, my bet is the ballot casting and voting machines are more protected now a days than days past.

We know that Russia was complicit in hacking the DNC and Podesta's emails and supplying the information to Wikileaks for the purposes of influencing the campaign. We also know of the close ties between the Russian and Trump teams i.e. Flynn, Manafort, Page. And we know that Trump favoured a reset with Russia which based on comments from Putin looks to be happening.

So why wouldn't Russia given (a) how bad the sanctions are, (b) the threat of NATO and (c) their desire to reclaim Baltic states do everything in their power to hack voting machines ?

And given this is state sponsored hacking what could possibly stop them ? Especially given that China managed to steal F-35 information despite surely some of the most stringent security controls around.

Sources?

Detailed intelligence was provided to Republicans e.g. Bob Corker and Democrats who were also left with the same conclusion.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-departme...

Well for one, "hacking" emails doesn't equal votes as far as I can tell and the link you provided doesn't talk about tampering with ballots or voting equipment. Where is the connection? This sounds like more conspiracy theory but I'm listening.

This election has basically been a breeding ground for conspiracy theories about vote rigging. The other main axes have been:

A viral claim that Trump won because 300,000 voters were turned away due to insufficient identification: http://www.snopes.com/300000-wisconsin-voters-turned-away-du... (Definitely not true. That was an estimate of the total number of people that might not have suitable ID under a law that was overturned. If I recall correctly, the estimate had some issues too. Also, Trump performed much better than expected amongst the demographic that was supposedly being turned away to win him the vote.)

A bizarre viral tweet asking people to contact the DoJ, together with a claim that more votes were counted for President than cast in one county in Wisconsin: http://www.snopes.com/audit-the-vote/ (Apparently the initial reports are just based on phoned-in results that are checked later, and someone misheard.)

A claim by Greg Palast that Crosscheck was used to rig the vote by purging the registrations of enough black voters in Michigan, Arizona and North Carolina to swing the vote. Not on Snopes, but the proposed mechanism wouldn't work - Michigan only purges voters on the list if they fail to reply to a posted notification and then don't vote in any elections between this one and January 2019, and the other states should have similar safeguards by federal law.

Couldn't Trump counter with much more serious claims of voting fraud that likely benefited Clinton? There is a paper from 2014 that demonstrates how votes by illegal immigrants have actually affected the outcomes of US elections: https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2016/11/17/study-illegal-ali...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com