User:Jbkonesky/sandbox

How Red states with a majority conservative population are turned Blue
Political Redistricting - Setting boundaries for blocks and precincts by consolidating and isolating the opposition into manageable groups.

Census Driven - Matching the census record with the actual vote and the registration data to determine how actual individuals are voting.

Enhanced Statistical Steroids - Using computerized statistical regression analysis to crunch the data and determine where voter Block and Precinct redistricting lines need to be drawn so opposition voters can be consolidated and isolated. Then determine how many registered non-voters and non-registered citizen voting age population (CVAP) can be registered and have a vote cast in proxy for them. Organizing all this data into simple Consolidation Blocks -> Consolidation Precincts, creating Matched and Un-Matched files that appropriately direct and apply the tabulation of votes on Election Day to hide the proxy votes.

In Counties using computer based tabulation systems, while abiding by the PL94-171 law, there is potential for fraud. This page will detail how this is done and provide proofs of the fraud in California.

Counties using the PL94-171 law are required to redistribute votes within Counties and Districts. By doing this, voting is supposedly equalized across reporting entities so those reporting entities have the same demographic makeup as other reporting entities within the same district, County or other reporting group. What is really happening, however, is the Block and Precinct boundaries are being organized so as many of the opposition, which can be Republican or Democrat, voters as possible are being grouped into as few blocks and precincts as possible. Any county could be used to show how this is done, But Alpine county, with only 656 reported voters in the 2012 Presidential General election is the easiest county that shows how this is done. The regrouping of the voters does three things:


 * 1) The remaining blocks have less conservative voters.
 * 2) The consolidation block can be altered and it will seem to follow the Republican or Democratic trend in the remaining blocks.
 * 3) Allows the reported Election to only be altered in a few blocks(approximately 10%) and the remaining blocks(90%) are untouched, thus avoiding detection.  This helps in the 1% canvas of the vote and certification, since you can present many blocks of voters that are correct for the reported vote and leave out the 10% of the altered(fraudulent) election results.


 * In synopsis, here is the process for electing the candidate of choice and eliminating the opposition:


 * Election Prediction files are created from historical election data. This election data is matched to individual voters using using a statistical analysis of three separate records. These records are the official State Block voting history (grouped by election G08 for the 2008 General election data, etc.), the State registration data by Block Voter Registration Statistics and the USA census data by tract CVAP.
 * Regression analysis is done with those files to determine how to draw Block and Precinct lines (supposedly in accordance with PL94-171).
 * The prediction files are updated with the current election Primary election data. in the 2012 election, the 2012 primary election data was used.
 * Opposition voters are grouped into as few blocks and precincts as possible.
 * Since the remaining blocks and precincts now have less opposition voters, it appears there are less opposition voters in the county.
 * Since 1992 non-voters have been registered to vote as DCL (decline to state political affiliation) Absentee voters. This makes up about 30% of the total absentee voters.
 * The matched and unmatched files are created. These files contain the predicted number DCL proxy absentee voters needed to support the predicted vote in the matched and un-matched files.
 * The proxy absentee votes are submitted like any absentee vote would be submitted prior to election day.
 * These proxy absentee votes are counted and reported on along with all the other legitimate absentee votes.
 * On election day all the votes from blocks and precincts that had most of the conservative voters removed, are reported in the election results as they happen and without any additional alteration.
 * Those votes continue to be reported without alteration until the total vote matches the the total vote in the matched file.
 * All the votes coming in from the precincts where the conservative voters were grouped together are allocated according to the un-matched file predictions. The votes cast by the conservative voters are masked until all the proxy absentee votes are also added into the total vote.
 * That method of grouping the conservative votes, adding proxy Absentee votes to those majority conservative groupings and removing the conservative voters from the remaining Blocks and Precincts gives the allusion that the makeup of the county, over many elections, is becoming more progressive (liberal).
 * This is all being done in conjunction with the SOE (SYCTL) software tabulation systems that are hosted by the vendor and not under the control of any state or county.
 * This vote manipulation is justified by and being done because of supposed "Racial Polarization".


 * "Public Law 94-171, enacted in 1975, directs the Census Bureau to make special preparations to provide redistricting data needed by the 50 states. It specifies that within a year following Census Day, the Census Bureau must send the governor and legislative leadership in each state the data they need to redraw districts for the United States Congress and state legislature."

The nature of this redistribution of votes requires tabulation software to ensure all the votes get to the correct City, County, Congressional District, Senatorial District, etc. This means votes, even at the Block level(street level) may be split and added to multiple reporting Precincts and then consolidated into consolidation Precincts.

When this level of detail is required, with certain percentages Block votes being split by percentage and then reconsolidated into multiple precincts, votes could potentially be consolidated and reported with altered results from they way they were originally cast. The files that do the vote spliting, percent assignment of Block vote to precinct, consolidation of the votes back to the reporting Precincts and the prediction files that predict the reported vote with 99.9% accuracy(in September,two months before the elections take place) have all been collected to show how this fraud occurs.

Article on SOE Tabulation systems:


 * "FOREIGN COMPANY BUYS U.S. ELECTION RESULTS REPORTING FIRM
 * January 18, 2012
 * By CMAC
 * DRUDGE REPORT
 * FOREIGN COMPANY BUYS U.S. ELECTION RESULTS REPORTING FIRM
 * By Bev Harris
 * http://www.blackboxvoting.org
 * In a major step towards global centralization of election processes, the world's dominant Internet voting company has purchased the USA's dominant election results reporting company.
 * When you view your local or state election results on the Internet, on portals which often appear to be owned by the county elections division, in over 525 US jurisdictions you are actually redirected to a private corporate site controlled by SOE software, which operates under the name ClarityElections.com.
 * The good news is that this firm promptly reports precinct-level detail in downloadable spreadsheet format. As reported by BlackBoxVoting.org in 2008, the bad news is that this centralizes one middleman access point for over 525 jurisdictions in AL, AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, KY, MI, KS, IL, IN, NC, NM, MN, NY, SC, TX, UT, WA. And growing.
 * As local election results funnel through SOE's servers (typically before they reach the public elsewhere), those who run the computer servers for SOE essentially get "first look" at results and the ability to immediately and privately examine vote details throughout the USA.
 * In 2004, many Americans were justifiably concerned when, days before the presidential election, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell redirected Ohio election night results through the Tennessee-based server for several national Republican Party operations.
 * This is worse: This redirects results reporting to a centralized privately held server which is not just for Ohio, but national; not just USA-based, but global.
 * A mitigation against fraud by SOE insiders has been the separation of voting machine systems from the SOE results reports. Because most US jurisdictions require posting evidence of results from each voting machine at the precinct, public citizens can organize to examine these results to compare with SOE results. Black Box Voting spearheaded a national citizen action to videotape / photograph these poll tapes in 2008.
 * With the merger of SOE and SCYTL, that won't work (if SCYTL's voting system is used). When there are two truly independent sources of information, the public can perform its own "audit" by matching one number against the other.
 * These two independent sources, however, will now be merged into one single source: an Internet voting system controlled by SCYTL, with a results reporting system also controlled by SCYTL.
 * With SCYTL internet voting, there will be no ballots. No physical evidence. No chain of custody. No way for the public to authenticate who actually cast the votes, chain of custody, or the count.
 * SCYTL is moving into or already running elections in: the United Kingdom, France, Canada, Norway, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, South Africa, India and Australia.
 * SCYTL is based in Barcelona; its funding comes from international venture capital funds including Nauta Capital, Balderton Capital and Spinnaker.
 * Here is the link to the press release regarding SYCTL's acquisition of SOE:
 * http://www.marketwatch.com/story/scytl-acquires-soe-software-becoming-the-leadin g-election-software-provider-2012-01-11
 * ES&S and Scytl Announce Strategic Alliance to Provide BALLOTsafe – a Military and Overseas Electronic Voting Solution
 * WE DID NOT FIND COMPLETE VOTING LIFECYCLE DOCUMENTATION…
 * Software Review and Security Analysis of Scytl Remote Voting …
 * election.dos.state.fl.us/voting-systems/pdf/FinalReportSept19.pdfSimilar
 * You +1′d this publicly. Undo
 * File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
 * by A Yasinsac – 2008 – Related articles
 * Sep 19, 2008 – 6 Scytl’s comments on the review report of Pnyx.core ODBP 1.0 …Scytl’s voting software is intended for use in the Okaloosa Distance Balloting …
 * You visited this page on 1/18/12.
 * Internet voting outfit Scytl secures $9.2m
 * my university
 * Scytl Secure Electronic Voting S.A. (Scytl)
 * Partner:
 * Scytl Secure Electronic Voting S.A. (Scytl) – Spain
 * Scytl Scytl Secure Electronic Voting S.A. (Scytl) is a software company specialized in the development of secure electronic voting solutions and e-participation systems. These solutions incorporate unique cryptographic protocols that enable to carry out all types of electronic voting processes or citizen participation projects in a completely secure and auditable manner. Scytl’s advanced e-voting security technology positions the company as a leader in the e-voting and e-consultation industry.
 * Scytl was formed as a spin-off from a leading research group at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain). This group, funded by the Spanish Government’s Ministry of Science and Technology, has pioneered the research on e-voting security in Europe since 1994 and has produced significant scientific results, including 25 scientific papers published in international journals and the first two European Ph.D. theses on electronic voting security, by Prof. Joan Borrell and Scytl’s founder Dr. Andreu Riera (in 1996 and 1999, respectively). This research group also participated in the first Internet binding election in Europe (i.e., the 1997 election to the Presidency of the IEEE IT Spanish chapter).
 * One of Scytl’s main strengths is its unique technology, which derives from over twelve years of pioneering R&D and is protected by a portfolio of international patents. The groundbreaking e-voting cryptographic protocols developed by Scytl provide e-voting with the highest levels of security, in terms of anonymity, ballot box integrity, and voter-verifiability. This innovative technology has received numerous international awards, including the prestigious IST Prize granted by the European Commission in 2005.
 * Scytl has customers both in the public and private sectors. The former are local, state (regional), and federal governments which license Scytl’s e-voting products to carry out their elections, referenda, or citizen consultations by electronic means. The latter are large corporations and organizations that choose Scytl’s technology to carry out by electronic means electoral/consultation processes such as labor union elections or shareholders’ meetings. Some of these customers represent leading references in the electronic voting industry (e.g., governments in Spain, Switzerland, Argentina, Finland and Australia that are pioneering new electronic voting applications). Scytl’s products have already been successfully used in multiple elections and consultations, some of which represent breakthrough projects for the electronic voting industry.
 * Scytl’s headquarters are located in Barcelona, Spain, with branch offices in Singapore and Washing-ton (USA). Scytl is composed of about 30 professionals from 12 different nationalities; 95% of which have a Bachelor degree or higher.
 * Scytl has executed several projects related to the eParticipation that have provided it a great insight on this subject:
 * Madrid Participa citizen consultations (awarded a Good Practice Label by the European Commission)
 * Consensus project, in collaboration with Gov2U. About 64 Spanish councils are using this eParticipation tool based on Gov2DemoSS.
 * Several other projects related to citizen consultations for cities such as Amposta, Gijón, Vitoria… all of them in Spain
 * Besides this eParticipation experience, Scytl has pioneered in the Internet voting segment, having worked for several Governments worldwide, such as the UK, Switzerland, Philippines…
 * Finally, also remark Scytl’s experience on the eRepresentative and Demos@Work EU funded project (Contract #026985 & #EP-07-01-035)"
 * File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Quick View
 * by A Yasinsac – 2008 – Related articles
 * Sep 19, 2008 – 6 Scytl’s comments on the review report of Pnyx.core ODBP 1.0 …Scytl’s voting software is intended for use in the Okaloosa Distance Balloting …
 * You visited this page on 1/18/12.
 * Internet voting outfit Scytl secures $9.2m
 * my university
 * Scytl Secure Electronic Voting S.A. (Scytl)
 * Partner:
 * Scytl Secure Electronic Voting S.A. (Scytl) – Spain
 * Scytl Scytl Secure Electronic Voting S.A. (Scytl) is a software company specialized in the development of secure electronic voting solutions and e-participation systems. These solutions incorporate unique cryptographic protocols that enable to carry out all types of electronic voting processes or citizen participation projects in a completely secure and auditable manner. Scytl’s advanced e-voting security technology positions the company as a leader in the e-voting and e-consultation industry.
 * Scytl was formed as a spin-off from a leading research group at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain). This group, funded by the Spanish Government’s Ministry of Science and Technology, has pioneered the research on e-voting security in Europe since 1994 and has produced significant scientific results, including 25 scientific papers published in international journals and the first two European Ph.D. theses on electronic voting security, by Prof. Joan Borrell and Scytl’s founder Dr. Andreu Riera (in 1996 and 1999, respectively). This research group also participated in the first Internet binding election in Europe (i.e., the 1997 election to the Presidency of the IEEE IT Spanish chapter).
 * One of Scytl’s main strengths is its unique technology, which derives from over twelve years of pioneering R&D and is protected by a portfolio of international patents. The groundbreaking e-voting cryptographic protocols developed by Scytl provide e-voting with the highest levels of security, in terms of anonymity, ballot box integrity, and voter-verifiability. This innovative technology has received numerous international awards, including the prestigious IST Prize granted by the European Commission in 2005.
 * Scytl has customers both in the public and private sectors. The former are local, state (regional), and federal governments which license Scytl’s e-voting products to carry out their elections, referenda, or citizen consultations by electronic means. The latter are large corporations and organizations that choose Scytl’s technology to carry out by electronic means electoral/consultation processes such as labor union elections or shareholders’ meetings. Some of these customers represent leading references in the electronic voting industry (e.g., governments in Spain, Switzerland, Argentina, Finland and Australia that are pioneering new electronic voting applications). Scytl’s products have already been successfully used in multiple elections and consultations, some of which represent breakthrough projects for the electronic voting industry.
 * Scytl’s headquarters are located in Barcelona, Spain, with branch offices in Singapore and Washing-ton (USA). Scytl is composed of about 30 professionals from 12 different nationalities; 95% of which have a Bachelor degree or higher.
 * Scytl has executed several projects related to the eParticipation that have provided it a great insight on this subject:
 * Madrid Participa citizen consultations (awarded a Good Practice Label by the European Commission)
 * Consensus project, in collaboration with Gov2U. About 64 Spanish councils are using this eParticipation tool based on Gov2DemoSS.
 * Several other projects related to citizen consultations for cities such as Amposta, Gijón, Vitoria… all of them in Spain
 * Besides this eParticipation experience, Scytl has pioneered in the Internet voting segment, having worked for several Governments worldwide, such as the UK, Switzerland, Philippines…
 * Finally, also remark Scytl’s experience on the eRepresentative and Demos@Work EU funded project (Contract #026985 & #EP-07-01-035)"
 * Scytl was formed as a spin-off from a leading research group at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (Spain). This group, funded by the Spanish Government’s Ministry of Science and Technology, has pioneered the research on e-voting security in Europe since 1994 and has produced significant scientific results, including 25 scientific papers published in international journals and the first two European Ph.D. theses on electronic voting security, by Prof. Joan Borrell and Scytl’s founder Dr. Andreu Riera (in 1996 and 1999, respectively). This research group also participated in the first Internet binding election in Europe (i.e., the 1997 election to the Presidency of the IEEE IT Spanish chapter).
 * One of Scytl’s main strengths is its unique technology, which derives from over twelve years of pioneering R&D and is protected by a portfolio of international patents. The groundbreaking e-voting cryptographic protocols developed by Scytl provide e-voting with the highest levels of security, in terms of anonymity, ballot box integrity, and voter-verifiability. This innovative technology has received numerous international awards, including the prestigious IST Prize granted by the European Commission in 2005.
 * Scytl has customers both in the public and private sectors. The former are local, state (regional), and federal governments which license Scytl’s e-voting products to carry out their elections, referenda, or citizen consultations by electronic means. The latter are large corporations and organizations that choose Scytl’s technology to carry out by electronic means electoral/consultation processes such as labor union elections or shareholders’ meetings. Some of these customers represent leading references in the electronic voting industry (e.g., governments in Spain, Switzerland, Argentina, Finland and Australia that are pioneering new electronic voting applications). Scytl’s products have already been successfully used in multiple elections and consultations, some of which represent breakthrough projects for the electronic voting industry.
 * Scytl’s headquarters are located in Barcelona, Spain, with branch offices in Singapore and Washing-ton (USA). Scytl is composed of about 30 professionals from 12 different nationalities; 95% of which have a Bachelor degree or higher.
 * Scytl has executed several projects related to the eParticipation that have provided it a great insight on this subject:
 * Madrid Participa citizen consultations (awarded a Good Practice Label by the European Commission)
 * Consensus project, in collaboration with Gov2U. About 64 Spanish councils are using this eParticipation tool based on Gov2DemoSS.
 * Several other projects related to citizen consultations for cities such as Amposta, Gijón, Vitoria… all of them in Spain
 * Besides this eParticipation experience, Scytl has pioneered in the Internet voting segment, having worked for several Governments worldwide, such as the UK, Switzerland, Philippines…
 * Finally, also remark Scytl’s experience on the eRepresentative and Demos@Work EU funded project (Contract #026985 & #EP-07-01-035)"
 * Madrid Participa citizen consultations (awarded a Good Practice Label by the European Commission)
 * Consensus project, in collaboration with Gov2U. About 64 Spanish councils are using this eParticipation tool based on Gov2DemoSS.
 * Several other projects related to citizen consultations for cities such as Amposta, Gijón, Vitoria… all of them in Spain
 * Besides this eParticipation experience, Scytl has pioneered in the Internet voting segment, having worked for several Governments worldwide, such as the UK, Switzerland, Philippines…
 * Finally, also remark Scytl’s experience on the eRepresentative and Demos@Work EU funded project (Contract #026985 & #EP-07-01-035)"
 * Besides this eParticipation experience, Scytl has pioneered in the Internet voting segment, having worked for several Governments worldwide, such as the UK, Switzerland, Philippines…
 * Finally, also remark Scytl’s experience on the eRepresentative and Demos@Work EU funded project (Contract #026985 & #EP-07-01-035)"
 * Finally, also remark Scytl’s experience on the eRepresentative and Demos@Work EU funded project (Contract #026985 & #EP-07-01-035)"

Here is the summary:

Official Riverside COunty SOV reported December 3rd, 2012(removing the "other" vote votes:

Vote as it should have been reported(without 60,627 overvotes):

Obama Romney Total Precinct 118378 134118 252496 ABS 150058 184009 334067 Total 268436 318127 586563

The difference in the above numbers is determined by 60,627 votes that cannot be tied to registered voters. The justification for removing those votes only from Obama follows in the following 6 presentations of proof:

1. Historical voting:

Riverside Statement of vote(president only) California Statement of vote 2,012 329,063 318,127 647,190 50.8% 49.2% 7,854,285 4,839,958 12,694,243 61.9% 38.1% 2,008 325,017 310,041 635,058 51.2% 48.8%  8,290,583 4,995,639 13,286,222 62.4% 37.6% 2,004 228,806 322,473 551,279 41.5% 58.5%  6,745,485 5,509,826 12,255,311 55.0% 45.0% 2,000 202,576 231,955 434,531 46.6% 53.4%  5,861,203 4,639,161 10,500,364 55.8% 44.2%  The 2000 election numbers were thrown off slightly by 4% of the vote going to Ralph Nader The 2000 percentages should be more for Bush and less for Gore

The historical vote data shows the history of Riverside County to vote for a republican candidate despite the whole state average voting for the Democrat candidate. This trend analysis ignores the 2008 election trend, since similar fraud occurred there as well.

2. The trend of absentee ballots tied to the increase in Democrat voters:

Year Total Vote Margin %Margin Dem Rep Democrat Republican Independ. Other General ABS Vote General Ballot Vote Percent ABS Ballot Obama Romney 2012 12,751,800 2,921,106 22.91% 60.23% 37.32% 7,680,493 4,759,387 0 311,920 6753688 13202158 51.16% Obama McCain 2008 13,577,265 3,262,692 24.03% 60.94% 36.91% 8,274,473 5,011,781 0 291,011 5722465 13743177 41.64% Bush Kerry 2004 12,419,857 1,235,659 9.95% 54.31% 44.36% 6,745,485 5,509,826 0 164,546 4105179 12589683 32.61% Bush Gore Nader 2000 10,965,856 1,293,774 11.80% 53.45% 41.65% 5,861,203 4,567,429 418,707 118,517 2732947 11142843 24.53% Clinton Dole Perot 1996 10,019,484 1,291,455 12.89% 51.10% 38.21% 5,119,835 3,828,380 697,847 373,422 2078065 10263490 20.25% Clinton Bush Perot 1992 11,131,721 1,490,751 13.39% 46.01% 32.61% 5,121,325 3,630,574 2,296,006 83,816 1950179 11374184 17.15% Bush Quayle 1988 9,887,064 352,684 3.57% 47.56% 51.13% 4,702,233 5,054,917 0 129,914 1434853 10194539 14.07% Regan Mondale 1984 9,505,423 1,544,490 16.25% 41.27% 57.51% 3,922,519 5,467,009 0 115,895 913574 9796375 9.33% Regan Carter 1980 8,587,063 1,441,197 16.78% 35.91% 52.69% 3,083,661 4,524,858 739,833 238,711 549007 8775459 6.26% Ford Carter 1976 7,867,117 139,960 1.78% 47.57% 49.35% 3,742,284 3,882,244 0 242,589 366535 8137202 4.50% Nixon McGovern 1972 8,367,862 1,126,249 13.46% 41.54% 55.00% 3,475,847 4,602,096 0 289,919 405688 8595950 4.72% Nixon Humphrey 1968 7,251,587 223,346 3.08% 44.74% 47.82% 3,244,318 3,467,664 487,270 52,335 334365 7363711 4.54% Johnson Humphrey 1964 7,057,586 1,292,769 18.32% 59.11% 40.79% 4,171,877 2,879,108 0 6,601 304858 7233067 4.21% Kennedy Nixon 1960 6,506,578 35,623 0.55% 49.55% 50.10% 3,224,099 3,259,722 0 22,757

The trend in the above table shows the trend toward the democrat vote is correlated to the increase in absentee votes. California has a history of being a swing state and still would be if it were not for the fraud.

3. Correlation of the SOV and my "real" vote numbers to the party registration data:

The Republican and Democrat, people who voted, registration data from the attached vote file:

Registered voter vote file:

Voter Reg Dem reg Rep reg 609,002 226,339 260,390 46.5% 53.5%

Official SOV File:

Obama Romney Total Obama Romney Final 329,063 318,127 647,190 50.8% 49.2% Prcnt SOV 153,088 134,118 287,206 53.3% 46.7% ABS SOV 175,975 184,009 359,984 48.9% 51.1%

These percentages are skewed very badly in favor of the democtrat candidate. The adjusted files with the removal of the 60,627 applies the votes more appropriately:

Obama Romney Total Obama Romney Precinct 118378 134118 252496 46.9% 53.1% ABS 150058 184009 334067 44.9% 55.1% Total 268436 318127 586563 45.8% 54.2% 45.8% 54.2%

4. Logical conclusion based on the file data progression. The Election day data should have included all the Precinct ballot data and some of the absentee ballot data:

Data from official SOV:

Obama Romney Total Dem Rep Final 329,063 318,127 647,190 50.8% 49.2% Prcnt SOV 153,088 134,118 287,206 53.3% 46.7% ABS SOV 175,975 184,009 359,984 48.9% 51.1%

Election Day results reported November 7th:

Obama Romney Total Election Day 247,760 255,296 503,056

The Precinct vote reported in the SOV shows a huge skew toward Obama. Those votes should all be included in the reported Election Day reporting, however, the Election Day results show Romney winning. In order to make these numbers work, as they were reported, the Absentee ballots reported and counted before Election Day would be heavily skewed toward Romney and the ones reported after Election Day would be heavily skewed toward Obama. ABS On Election Day, Obama 94,672 and Romney 121,078. ABS After Election Day, Obama 81,303 and Romney 62,831.

5. The matched and unmatched prediction files(attached) from September, 2012, predict nearly exactly the outcome for the Riverside County vote for the Republican and Democrat candidate:

Obama Romney Final SOV 329,063 318,127 647,190 50.8% 49.2% September Prediction 318,591 306,882 625,473 50.9% 49.1%

This prediction file shows the people who made the prediction were either prophets or they "made" the vote come out the way it did. Of course they were wrong about the number of people that would actually vote.

6. If the September votes are seperated out in the prediction files by Matched Original Precinct, Matched consolidated precinct, unmatched Original Precinct and Unmathced Consolidation, you get the following results:

My consolidation file(ConsolidationAndResult.xlsm), on the "Riverside 2012 SOVTransform-PDF", tab shows exactly how the "over votes" were aplied to each precinct and how many were applied to the Prcinct vote and Absentee vote. Here are the sum totals:

ABS Precinct Total 25917 34710 60627

I can go on and on with the discrepancies and analytical proofs of the fraud, but I have already done that in other formats and it is just too much information. Let it suffice that this data could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the fraud actually occurred and if accepted as truth, Obama did not actually win the 2012 election. I am only showing the instance fron one California county. This was not limited to California, nor to this California County.