If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
IF OBAMA WAS STRUGGLING TO RALLY HIS BASE WEEKS BEFORE THE ELECTION, HOW DID HE WIN “DECISIVELY?”
November 8, 2012
Rep. Darrell Issa, Chairman
House Oversight & Government Reform Committee
2157 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Chairman Issa:
The 2012 presidential election is over, and Barack Hussein Obama is allegedly the winner of a second term in office. Quite frankly, however, the results do not make sense.
While on October 31, the race between Romney and Obama in Florida was reported as “too close to call” as of this writing has still not been finalized there, other polls showed that Romney had as much as a five-point lead in Virginia on the same date, which was after Hurricane Sandy and the day on which Obama visited storm-ravaged New Jersey with Gov. Chris Christie.
It is understood that each polling organization uses its own methods of sampling, collecting, and analyzing data. However, Rasmussen, a very reliable polling company, found that Romney was ahead by three points in Colorado on October 31 and tied in Wisconsin. Another poll showed an eight-point lead by Obama in Wisconsin. How could both be accurate?
Then, somehow, on Election Day, Obama supposedly won Colorado. How was it that Obama appeared to gain in “swing states” just prior to the election when Romney had been leading in at least several of them?
In early voting in at least three states, voters were able to see that their choice made for Romney was registered on the machines as having been cast for Obama. The same anomaly was reported in Kansas, North Carolina, Colorado and Ohio, the latter two of which were considered “swing” states which could go either way on Election Day.
How is it that Obama won all of the “swing” states except North Carolina, in keeping with predictions made by a leftwing website (Talking Points Memo) the day before the election? With Romney competitive just days before the election in states which Obama had won in 2008, what prompted a shift to Obama in all of them except one so late in the campaign?
In Pennsylvania, some votes for Obama were changed to Romney but the mistake was reportedly caught and corrected.
Four weeks prior to the election, “voter apathy” among Latinos and blacks was cited as a concern for Obama’s re-election, while the Romney campaign gained enthusiasm with women voters three weeks before the election. Voter registration was reportedly much lower than expected with Democrats a month before the election.
Why was it that Romney was predicted to win if “enthusiasm” were the determining factor, but he did not win?
When even a U.S. Representative is caught electioneering during the 2010 midterm election to garner more Democrat votes, is it difficult to believe that some form of fraud did not take place this past Tuesday? Were pre-programmed voting machines used to re-elect Sen. Harry Reid in 2010?
Voting machines have been reported to be highly susceptible to sabotage; Obama was trailing in the polls in the weeks leading up to the election, and certain swing states were needed by each candidate to win. In a press release from PRNewswire dated November 1, 2012, author and election researcher Dr. Kaasem Khaleel contends that voting machines are fraught with fraudulent results and has designed a new system which he states would eliminate the problem. Khaleel openly endorsed Rep. Ron Paul for President, stating that Paul was “the only presidential candidate who stands strong in upholding the rule of law, the Constitution of the United States, sends a powerful message that the American people are sick and tired of the corruption and the rigged system and will not stand for it any longer. It says that, at a minimum, the people will not play the game of falsely selected candidates, where the winner is picked in advance and seek redress and protest against this illegal, unconstitutional, and rigged system.”
A report published on November 7, 2012 stated that Obama failed to prevail in all states which require some form of voter identification. Isn’t it interesting that states such as Connecticut, which early on indicated could favor Romney, pushed through a change to the law earlier this year whereby no voter photo identification was required? Moreover, the U.S. Department of Justice sued several states which passed laws requiring picture voter ID, including South Carolina, Texas and Arizona.
In 2000, computer programmer Clinton Eugene Curtis stated under oath that elections could easily be “fixed” and that he had written a program to “flip the vote.” He testified that “all parties” would have to “hide the fraud in the source code” to discover whether or not “vote-rigging” had occurred within the software. “If you have polling data that is significantly off from the vote, it’s probably hacked,” he said.
One of the programmer’s questioners was U.S. Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, who died suddenly under mysterious circumstances on August 20, 2008. One week prior, Arkansas Democrat Party Chairman Bill Gwatney was murdered by a gunman who shot him in cold blood in his office. Both Gwatney and Tubbs Jones were Hillary Clinton supporters. Tubbs had also agreed to place Clinton’s name into nomination at the 2008 DNC. Obama has been accused of having committed election fraud in the 2008 primaries by several eyewitnesses. Two other people who possessed information potentially damaging to Barack Obama subsequently suffered untimely deaths.
Rep. Allen West of Florida is demanding a hand recount after some polls had shown him considerably ahead of contender Patrick Murphy. West has claimed that “tens of thousands of absentee ballots” had not been counted, that the doors to the polling place closed early in violation of state law, and that other “disturbing irregularities” had occurred on Election Day, causing him to question the results.
There are eyewitness reports of non-English-speaking Somali refugees being bussed in to polling places in Ohio and instructed on how to vote for Democrats “all the way down.”
While left-leaning media decry a “growing partisan divide” between Republicans and Democrats, the media itself often broadcasts to influence its audience rather than to issue an objective news report.
Scott Brown of Massachusetts had been leading contender Elizabeth Warren in September, but after a reported gain in polling in the last weeks before the election, Democrat Warren was pronounced the winner on Tuesday night. A similar outcome was seen in the U.S. Senate race between Linda McMahon and Chris Murphy, who cannot even show up for votes in the House of Representatives the majority of the time.
A pattern appears to have arisen in several races: the Republican candidate is leading by several points a month or two prior to Election Day, then the Democrat “gains” on the Republican within days of the election and wins by a very narrow margin; just enough to be declared the winner of a very close election.
Just how “decisive” was Obama’s win? As in other races where Democrats won over Republicans, why is it that Obama won by such a narrow margin determined by swing states identified well in advance? An election analyst is asking the same question and calling for a recount prior to the certification of the Electoral College votes next month.
The Post & Email posits that, given the above evidence, significant voter fraud was carried out to the extent that voting machines could have had code embedded in enough cases to change the outcome of the election in Obama’s and other Democrats’ favor. We are therefore demanding that the appropriate congressional committee launch a FORENSIC INVESTIGATION of voting machines AND AN ACCOMPANYING CERTIFIED AUDIT by CPAs of votes cast, both to be carried out by firms unassociated with the federal government.
Very truly yours,