THE DYNAMIC OF FRAUD IN IOWA
DINAMICA DEL FRAUDE EN IOWA
INTRODUCTION
Hugo Adan. Feb 2. 2016
That I’m going to show
is a fraud that constitute A CRIME AGAINST DEMOCRACY.
If FED authorities and Courts do nothing to stop this fraud,
they are accomplices of the crime.
They can argue that there are NOT LAWS to indict &
placed in Jail the perpetrators whose names & pictures appear in the 4 Videos below.
If FED authorities & COURTS cannot indict them, then we
have Institutional inefficiency,
and that is penalized in any Legal State standard. It constitute
a crime against the State.
If it is argued that not even such rules exist.. then you are accomplices of THE DEATH OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY
----
To the readers:
FIRST OPEN this
web-site:
THEN OPEN this other one
----
FINALLY open the
file:
CLINTON’S LUCKY QUARTER:
DEMOCRATIC FRONTRUNNER WINS 6 COIN TOSSES IN NARROW IOWA CAUCUS VICTORY
Published time: 2
Feb, 2016 11:48
Here the article:
The gods were
certainly smiling on Hilary Clinton as the Democrat presidential candidate won
SIX coin tosses to help her edge past rival Bernie Sanders in the Iowa Caucus
and take first blood in the party's nomination race.
Josh Jordan @NumbersMuncher.
There were six different
instances where a coin toss was used to determine the winner of a delegate in
Iowa, and Hillary won all six. Wow.
One of the close
calls took place in the city of Ames, which is around 30 miles (48km) north of
the state capital Des Moines, and is home to Iowa State University.
“A total of 484
eligible caucus attendees were initially recorded at the site. But when each
candidate’s preference group was counted, Clinton had 240 supporters, Sanders
had 179 and Martin O’Malley had five (causing him to be declared non-viable),”
said David Schweingruber, a sociology professor at Iowa State University, who
was present at the caucus and explained the situation to the Des Moines
Register.
The discrepancy
prompted the precinct leaders to call a Democratic Party hotline, in order to
find out how the situation should be handled. Despite having the latest
technology at their disposal, the Democrat Party hierarchy decided the best
course of action would be to go back to basics and settle the dispute with a
coin toss!
A supporter in the
Clinton camp correctly called “heads” meaning that Clinton picked up
five of the eight delegates in precinct 2-4 Ames. https://www.rt.com/usa/330990-clinton-coin-toss-iowa/
Unbelievable coin toss
decides a dead heat in west Davenport! @HillaryClinton wins! @chucktodd @CNBC @NBCNews
-----
However, this was anything but an isolated incident. Two
precincts in Des Moines and one each in Newton, West Branch and Davenport all
had to be decided by the toss of the coin.
Amazingly, Clinton
managed to win each of these coin tosses, which helped her to eventually secure
victory in the Iowa Caucus.
Democratic Party
figures stated that Clinton won by just four delegates, in a result Sanders
called a “virtual tie.”
..
Hillary Wins #Iowa over Sanders by
'winning' six coin tosses in a row. Odds this can happen randomly is 1 in 64 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/hillary-clinton/12135394/iowa-caucus-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-coin-toss.html?sf20155938=1 …
----
The Clinton's relying on
money to win an election. #cointoss
----
So bizarre that Clinton won
6 of 99 precincts on a coin toss. Wouldn't it make more sense to award 3 to
each tied candidate?
— Liam (@msdosh) February 2, 2016
----
Number
of flips: 6
Coins number of heads: 6
Number
of tails: 0
----
Hillary Clinton Has The Most
Statistically Improbable Coin-Toss Luck Ever #DESMOINES #Iowa http://follownews.com/qlba
….
THESE FRAUDS IS THAT HILLARY CALLED “EXPERIENCE” IN ONE OF HE
SPEECHES
This is the way she uses the money from super-packs: to serve the interest of the 1%.
----
----
----
RELATED ARTICLE:
Bernie Sanders urges raw vote re-counted
from Iowa caucus, after virtual tie with
Clinton
Published time: 2
Feb, 2016
Sanders spoke of an
unfolding controversy at certain Iowa precincts which did not have enough
Democratic party volunteers to report delegate totals. He called on officials
to reveal underlying voter totals, a strategy which is not not typically
practiced in Iowa.
“I
HOPE AND EXPECT THAT THE COUNT WILL BE HONEST” said Sanders,
as quoted by the Guardian.
..
Mi comentario final de este episodio vergonzoso.
..
Mi comentario final de este episodio vergonzoso.
..
En tiempo de fraudes.. creer en la honestidad de dona Hillary y los felones bien pagados por WS que la acompanian .. es pecado de lesa humanidad. Lo que practico Hillary in Iowa NO fue democracia, no lo es en ningun pais civilizado del mundo. Es fraude, deshonestidad y burla a la fe publica. En una real democracia los resultados de las elecciones dependen del numero de votantes para cada candidato, no de quien cuenta los votos ni de tirar monedas al aire. En Iowa los votos los conto los partidarios de un bando, los de Hillary y el numero de delegados no fue proporcional al N. de votantes, se decidio lanzando una moneda al aire por uno de sus compinches. El fraude ocurrio en 6 precintos (o distritos electorales). Eso es lo que debe anularse. Si hay honestidad debiera transferirse la victoria a Sanders en esos precintos. El conteo inicial de los votantes y conteo el final debieron coincidir, no fue asi. Es la prueba mayor del fraude. La diferencia final fue menor al -2%, un "virtual empate" como le llamo Sanders y el numero de delegados debio ser tambien 50/50. No fue asi. No solo hubo fraude en la manipulacion del conteo de votantes, votos y distribucion de delegados, hubo ademas asalto a la fe publica cuando Hillary anuncio su victoria sin que se corrija el fraude cometido en 6 precintos electorales. Lo honesto debe ser distribuir el numero de delegados por igual, como lo indicaron los resultados finales. Esperamos la correccion.
-----
===
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario