Bernie Landslide in CA Humboldt Cty (Open Source system)

02 Jul

A Bernie Landslide in CA Humboldt County (Open Source Voting Tabulation System)

Richard Charnin
July 2, 2016
Updated: Oct.29, 2017 to include the following link.
Jill Stein’s vote in Humboldt confirms Clinton fraud in CA.

Richard Charnin

Matrix of Deceit: Forcing Pre-election and Exit Polls to Match Fraudulent Vote Counts
Proving Election Fraud: Phantom Voters, Uncounted Votes and the National Poll
Democratic Primaries spread sheet
From TDMS Research: Democratic 2016 primaries

In California there is just ONE county which uses an Open Source System to count votes. Could that be why Bernie had 71% of the 2-party vote in Humboldt County? It was his highest vote share in ALL 58 counties!  The system is a deterrent to fraud.

View the  58 California counties: Election Day and post-Election Day votes.

The Humboldt Open Source (TEVS) tabulation system was pioneered in 2006 by Mitch Trachtenberg, a computer programmer, together with Carolyn Crnich, registrar of Humboldt County and Kevin Collins, election integrity activist. The election showed significant problems in the Diebold system they were using in counting votes.

As result of these problems, Diebold abruptly severed its business relationship with Humboldt. Carolyn then switched to another voting company, Hart InterCivic, but kept the TEVS system functioning.

TEVS is the ONLY OPEN SOURCE, TRANSPARENT SYSTEM FOR COUNTING VOTES IN THE UNITED STATES  It is being used as a recounting system to double-check  the vote-counting of the Hart InterCivic system which  has been performing well, unlike the Diebold system which was used previously.

At the time she introduced TEVS, Carolyn purchased  a high speed scanner that could operate independently of any voting machine to  tabulate the votes using TEVS.

Confirmation of Greg Palast: Bernie won CA by at least 100,000 votes.


Posted by on July 2, 2016 in 2016 election, Uncategorized


Tags: , , , , ,

9 responses to “Bernie Landslide in CA Humboldt Cty (Open Source system)

  1. Oma Vic McMurray

    July 2, 2016 at 6:15 pm

    can you comment on this?
    thanks again for all you do, so glad to hear about the dual counting systems, would love to hear more about that and how to get other counties to follow suit.

  2. CarlAntoine

    July 3, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    Reblogged this on carlantoine and commented:
    #BernieSanders #FeelTheBern #OurRevolution #BernieOrBust #JillStein {#Clinton #Trump} #MSMbias #ElectionFraud #CA #OpenSource

  3. oldpol2

    July 4, 2016 at 5:38 pm

    I would love to see this instituted across the country. We must absolutely seize our elections from the hands of special interests!

  4. Donna Smith

    July 4, 2016 at 10:32 pm

    Hi Mr. Charnin, Have you seen the video posted on youtube today of the election observers in San Diego? They aren’t allowed to be in the same room they’re counting votes in – but can observe from a window. With a zoom lense, they recorded the processing of just one station (the closest to the window and the only one they were able to record). It appeared as though several of the ballots had the “fill in bubble” next to Bernie’s name completely whited out – and no other selection was made. I’ll try to post the link to the video here – but I’d also like your comments on this, if possible. Personally, I’m furious. Here’s the link:

  5. Glen Warner

    July 8, 2016 at 7:03 pm

    Hi, Richard.

    How hard would it be to get your system in use throughout the country? It’s pretty clear that it is needed!

    • Richard Charnin

      October 28, 2017 at 4:50 pm

      Impossible. The establishment would never allow it because it would work.

  6. Brent Turner

    October 26, 2017 at 11:05 am

    The Humboldt system is NOT a vetted nor regulated open source voting system but merely a ” knock off ” audit system set up to sit on the back of a proprietary counting system. It is a foolish and childish attempt by Lori Grace and her billionaire friends to co-opt the work of the open source voting community.– please refrain from drawing conclusions. Obviously Bernie runs strong in Humboldt– but that has nothing to do with this flawed– pretend open source – system

    • Richard Charnin

      October 28, 2017 at 4:48 pm

      Brent Turner,

      I knew it was you. You’re the only one who has attacked TEVS.
      You exhibit Open Source envy of TEVS because you do not have a system in place.

      TEVS Open Source has been a proven success in Humboldt.
      Where is your system?

      How come you never mentioned this Humboldt analysis? Because it totally refutes your comment?

      In the 2016 presidential election, Jill Stein’s 6.1% Humboldt share was her highest in the state – just like it was for Bernie. Clinton’s 56% share in Humboldt ranked #20 of 58 California counties.

      Stein’s average in the 19 counties was 2.3%. Clinton averaged 68.0%. So how come Stein did 4% better in Humboldt than she did in the other 19 liberal counties? And Clinton did 12% worse?

      Did Jill Stein actually have an approximate 6% True vote in liberal CA? Did she have 4% nationally? Who believes she had just 1%? Just asking.

      Could it be that fraud was prevented in Humboldt? Were nearly 2/3 of Stein’s votes blue-shifted to Clinton? Was Clinton’s 61% CA share inflated by at least 4%? Note that 4% of 14 million CA votes is 560,000. That’s a 1.2 million difference in vote margin. She won the national recorded vote by 2.8 million.

      You’ve been all talk and no system for years.
      Put up or shut up.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: