Jim Forsythe for Congress
Did you know that in New Hampshire a mere $500,000 would fund
a very credible campaign for U.S. Congress? Did you know that the only candidate so far to be endorsed by Dr. Paul for U.S. House of Representatives is running in N.H.’s first district? Jim Forsythe has recently filed his FEC paperwork to run, and is devoting 100% of his time now to running – he is in to win! Jim’ diverse experiences in military, business, and academics have greatly impressed the voters of New Hampshire as he has started his campaign.
On March 31st, the quarter will end, and FEC
finance reports will be made. We need to help Jim get the most money possible by then in order to send a strong signal of the strength of his campaign. To that end, I have started up two pledge banks – one for $25, and one for $100. Please signup, and
donate immediately! And if you can donate more than $100, please do! And spread the word to everyone you know who believes in limited government.
I recently got a fundraising letter from Dr. Forsythe, and
in it he said: “I joined the Air Force to support and defend the
Constitution, no matter the personal risk, and I will continue that fight by saying “no” in Congress!”. Please join me in supporting someone who will have the courage to stand up and be heard in Congress! Donations can be made directly at www.jimforsythe.com.
- Dreepa's blog
- Login or register to post comments
OK I contributed. Saw this guy on YouTube. Rocks!
***************************************************
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
Watch and feel the power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FSP forums
I don't know jim personally but I know of Jim through the net. Before the various Ron Paul sites popped up there were very few places with pro-liberty discussions. I spent most of my time on the free state project forums where there used to be an almost constant discussion of libertarian issues. I remember Jim popping in once in a while and always had common sense responses to the various topics and seemed to be steadfast in his libertarian principles in a very practical manner. He does more than just talk about it, he's active in NH as are a lot of the free staters.
I'd put him up in the top 2-3 people from the forums that I'd support.
Jim Forsythe's 12/17 Speech in Support of Ron Paul
Jim Forsythe stated his position on a non-interventionist foreign policy and his support of Ron Paul in a speech at the Boston Ron Paul rally on that snowy day in December. The video of this speech is also great. He is truly worthy of our support.
Jim Forsythe PhD, Aerospace Engineer and former tanker pilot who flew missions to Bosnia and Kosovo gave this speech at the Boston Tea Party celebration for Ron Paul at Faneuil Hall, Boston today. Long live the "Second American Revolution" of 2008.
Enjoy!
- Jane
http://www.dailypaul.com/...
"I can’t wear my uniform and make a political speech, so instead I’ll just place my desert boots here to remind us all of our soldiers who have served throughout our history, and are currently serving in the Middle East.
On this historic day, I ask you to imagine that we are the 11,000 soldiers camped out with General George Washington at Valley Forge in the winter of 1777. We come from every state in the Union. We are as young as 12, as old as 60, and come from all walks of life. Look around at your fellow patriots. Pick out four people. By the end of winter, one of them will probably be dead. It might be you. Yet despite your tragic loss this winter, you will be joined by others, and in three long arduous years, you will defeat the British Empire, despite overwhelming odds. You have come here today despite the risk to your life, because you believe that Liberty is a cause worth fighting for. In the words of John Stark, a New Hampshire Patriot, you believe that we should “Live Free or Die, Death is not the worst of evils.”
But all this sacrifice could have been for nothing if the founding fathers had chosen to set up a government as despotic as the one that they rebelled against. This is exactly what happened to the French and the Russians after their revolutions - they traded one tyrant for another. Instead, the founding fathers set up a Constitutional Republic, binding the government in the chains of the Constitution. Our first President, George Washington voluntarily stepped down after two terms, setting up a tradition that lasted until President FDR. We owe an immense debt of gratitude to these men who risked everything and sacrificed so much. We should heed their words and their warnings, and reflect on how our country has lived up to their expectations.
In Common Sense, the document that helped spark the revolution, Thomas Paine wrote:
"Our plan is commerce, and that, well attended to, will secure us the peace and friendship of all Europe,"
In the Declaration of Independence, the founders laid out the train of abuses of the King. Several of the abuses dealt with the overly militaristic mercantilist approach of the British Empire.
“The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
“He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
“He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
“For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
“For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world.”
Several weeks before his farewell address, Washington succinctly stated his noninterventionist policy in a letter to James Monroe: "I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation had a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one had a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under themselves."
In his farewell address, he spent a great deal of time on this issue, concluding,
“The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.”
Thomas Jefferson later stated:
"I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war. All their energies are expended in the destruction of the labor, property and lives of their people."And he also said
"Never was so much false arithmetic employed on any subject as that which has been employed to persuade nations that it is in their interests to go to war."
These patriots believed that the proper role of the military was to defend the Union. They were willing to fight and die for Liberty and the Union. But they were not willing to risk the lives of fellow Americans for the sake of increasing American influence overseas. They had seen how the British Mercantilist form of government led to constant war, and instead favored free trade and a non-interventionist foreign policy. They restrained the ability of the government to go to war by vesting the power to declare war in the legislative branch, since as Madison wrote to Jefferson:
”The constitution supposes, what the history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has accordingly with studied care vested the question of war in the Legislature.”
Now, fast forward to 1991. The cold war has ended, and I’m a young Air Force 2nd Lieutenant, driving to Texas on my way to pilot training, and the Gulf war begins. I’m too busy learning how to fly jet aircraft to really examine the cause of the war. Certainly our government knows what it is doing. But something doesn’t seem quite right, since I signed up to defend my country, and I’m not sure exactly how a war in the Middle East is a direct threat to us.
After graduating, and getting assigned to KC-135 refueling aircraft, I receive my first overseas assignment to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, enforcing the no-fly zone over Iraq. We flew sorties daily next to the Iraqi border, refueling fighter aircraft who patrolled the southern no-fly zone. When I came home and told my friends and family about my trip to Saudi, the general reaction was, “Oh, I thought the war was over? Are we still over there?” Yes, we were, and I would go back two more times over the next five years, stopping at one of our bases in England on the way over.
Between trips to Saudi Arabia, I would also go to France and Italy to fly combat support operations to enforce the no-fly zone over Bosnia. And I also got to sit alert, and launch in support of transport operations into Somalia. It was a surreal experience – coming back from one foreign country to spend a few months with my kids before launching for yet another foreign country. I flew with a married couple that had a child. They could never be assigned overseas together, since one of them needed to be with their child, so instead, they alternated overseas assignments, seeing each other for a few weeks before one or the other would go back overseas. We were at a war-time ops tempo despite officially being at war with no-one. I would earn three aerial achievement medals for flying combat support missions, despite the fact that America had not declared war with any country.
But the experience I will always remember is my flight into Dhahran Saudi Arabia, to stay at the Khobar towers. Two weeks later, terrorists would bomb this facility, killing 19 American soldiers. The reason given to us by our intelligence officers was that the Saudi people resented our being there, propping up what they saw as an American puppet government dictatorship. Whether or not this is true, it made me wonder why we were defending a country when the people of that country didn’t want us there. It was a chilling pre-cursor to 9/11, as 15 of 19 of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Even before the Khobar towers bombing, we had been required to change into civilian clothes on the way to and from the airfield, so the threat had been known and anticipated. Yet politicians will say what most who have served in the Middle East know is a lie – that they only attack us because we are free. Although this may be part of it, things are not that simple. And those that deny that occupation is part of the motivation put my fellow solidiers at risk, as the Khobar towers bombing will attest.
Clearly America has not heeded the advice of Paine, Jefferson, Washington, and Madison, men who risked all that they had for our freedom. We have spent over 16 years in an undeclared war with Iraq, spending about one trillion dollars, and thousands of lives. Yes, that’s right – 16 years, ever since 1991. People tend to forget the years between the Gulf Wars, but I don’t, as that’s when I was flying combat support operations. How many more lives will we spend in Iraq? Will my friends currently over there come home alive? How long will we be there?
We’ve spent over fifty years in Korea, having fought an undeclared war. In fact, President Truman didn’t even bother to go to Congress, but instead got his authorization from the United Nations! This was a slap in the face for the brave soldiers who swore to uphold the Constitution, which requires Congress to declare war. This transgression along with the undeclared Vietnam War led to passage of the War Powers Resolution, which actually seems to have made things worse. Clinton sent the military into conflicts dozens of times during his two terms, as I should know. And during Kosovo he bombed Serbia for several months, after the House had voted against authorizing the Air War. Did you know we are currently fighting in Columbia, South America? We have over 700 bases in over 130 countries, with over ¼ of a million military members stationed overseas (prior to Iraq).
As Dr Paul said in Iowa “Our Founding Fathers would be ashamed of us”.
Madison’s warnings are completely prophetic:
"Of all the enemies of true liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.”
We are told over and over again to “support the troops”, suggesting that if we question going to war we have somehow disrespected the troops. Well, I am a troop. And so are the other soldiers who have donated more to Ron Paul’s campaign than to any other candidate. We signed up willing to sacrifice our lives to maintain liberty, just as those soldiers at Valley Forge did to gain our liberty. The best support people can give to the troops is to make sure that our politicians obey the rule of law in declaring war. This will ensure that we go to war carefully, and for the proper reasons, with well defined objectives.
We are told over and over again, that if you don’t support this foreign policy, you are weak on defense. But how does stationing ¼ of a million troops overseas while our borders are open provide a strong defense? How does stationing troops in two Middle Eastern countries provide a strong defense when it is well documented that occupation helps recruit terrorist and drive suicide terrorism, as I experienced in the bombing of the Khobar towers. Al Qaeda is reported to be stronger than ever. How does delegating the pursuit of terrorists to foreign governments like Pakistan, while attacking a country that had not attacked us provide a strong defense.
For a strong defense, what we need is to protect our borders, not attempt to remake borders overseas. We need to pursue a non-interventionist foreign policy, with free trade and travel to engender the good will of the world. And when we are attacked we need to go after those that have attacked us, and only those that attacked us. What we need, is Ron Paul. In his ten terms he has consistently fought to protect our borders. He has consistently advocated a non-interventionist foreign policy and free trade. And he advocated directly targeting the terrorists, by voting to pursue them in Afghanistan. He also sponsored a bill to target the terrorist directly through constitutional means, but was ignored.
It has become abundantly clear to me that the revolution sparked by the Boston Tea Party was gradually abandoned over the last two centuries. Our non-interventionist foreign policy was abandoned by Wilson, who said we should “make the world safe for democracy,” leading to WW1. But the withering torch of freedom has once again been re-ignited. The revolution began at Lexington and Concord 10 miles west of this cradle of liberty. And the beginning of the second American Revolution will also take place in Concord. But it will be Concord, New Hampshire, headquarters of the New Hampshire Ron Paul for President Campaign. Join Operation Live Free or Die and come help us succeed in New Hampshire.
Do you want to return to the non-interventionist foreign policy our founders envisioned? Who’s foreign policy do you want - that of Washington, or of Wilson? In honor of the first Boston Tea Party, I would like to throw our current interventionist policy away, symbolized by these dessert boots. And, in return, I would like to take something back as well. I want our troops home from all across the world, to do what they signed up to do – defend our country, and the Constitution of the United States."
CNN coverage: http://www.youtube.com/wa...
A fine speech. Sounds like the "real
deal" and someone I can support. Lot's to do in NH!
Jim is the real deal even if
Jim is the real deal even if his website doesn't advertise it.
You guys have to understand, Ron Paul developed a pretty bad reputation in NH because of the nonstop phone calls and mailings. People turned sour to Paul. They like McCain there.
Forsythe's just trying to get the most amount of Republicans to vote for him. That means touting issues that they will accept.
I can't imagine
that someone pretending to be a mainstream republican, but who is actually a RP republican, is going to attract much attention or $$.
BTW, RP didn't lose NH because of phone calls or mailings. Keep in mind that RP and McCain were both running about 4% last Oct. What happened? RP managed to get to 7% and McCain won it. And he did it with hardly any $$, no real grassroots campaign, and a bunch of bogus ideas!
ok
blah blah blah based on the website
this is the man who started and ran ronpaulhq.com
support him please.
He didn't start
He didn't start ronpaulhq.com but he did run it.. (PM me for details if you want them)
You are 100% correct that Jim is worthy of our support.
www.jimforsythe.com
www.ronpaulhq.com
not OK - I disagree
This guy did not even mention that he was opposed to the war in Iraq on his website. I have never seen a political campaign website for any candidate that was this sparse on how the candidate stands on issues.
And frankly, I did not donate money to Ron Paul because I feel so strongly that immigration is a huge problem in this country. This whole suggestion of building a fence along the borders makes me wonder sometimes if the government is more interested in keeping people out, or will eventually be used to prevent people from leaving .. (reminiscent of the Berlin Wall)
Ron Paul also received donations from White Supremicists. Just because somebody is a supporter, does not mean that person is somebody I will also support.
His website is poor.
If you didn't give money to
If you didn't give money to Ron Paul then I expect you won't give money to Jim.
The website is still being worked on as we speak.
Jim will support and defend the Constitution.
www.ronpaulhq.com
correction
My past comment was poorly worded.
I did donate money to Ron Paul's campaign ..
What I meant to say was, Ron Paul's stance on immigration was NOT the reason that I supported him / gave him money.
As far as Jim's website still being worked on .. not sure how long it should take to add in a couple lines about very high priority things such as "repealing the patriot act" or "not initiating unnecessary wars" .. I would think those things should have AT LEAST the same priority as what he had written on immigration.
As far as "defending the Constitution" .. that's pretty vague and really not a selling point. For example, we have a group of people who presumptuously took up the name "Constitution Party" who somehow interpret this to mean that they need to uphold all kinds of Federal laws against drug usage .. "drugs" are never even mentioned in the Constitution.
And I would like to see the Income Tax Amendment repealed, not defended.
There seem to be a lot of candidates trying to spin-off from Ron Paul's campaign, by simply using his name, without looking up the details. e.g. even Ron Paul's friend Gilchrest from Maryland, who is getting ousted from Congress .. good riddance. I am really surprised Ron Paul backed him, but I suspect this support was more of the nature of, Gilchrest was less cruddy than most members of Congress as far as Iraq war policy and opposing the Patriot Act. But did anybody ever bother to look up Gilchrest's record on TaxPayer websites? His record on spending is atrocious, he voted yes on pork spending more than the majority of Republicans in Congress. So good riddance .. who cares if he lost the primary.
It's a bit off topic, but I was also extremely disappointed with Murray Sabrin's website. Had I not known that Murray Sabrin ran as a Libertarian in the past, I would have never guessed it. Apparently he felt that the incumbent Senator's vote against making English the official language of the US, was more significant than his vote in favor of the Patriot Act. This is just a joke.
Ron Paul has already proven himself with a long voting record, and a past run as a LIbertarian for president. Anybody running for office under the coat-tails of Ron Paul, STILL has the responsibility to prove they fall in line with Paul's libertarian positions.
I see nothing of interest in this candidate.
His website features a few paragraphs of weak ideas on 2 issues. If he has any libertarian tendencies they are hidden...
So why did Dr. Paul endorse this guy?
The website is still being
The website is still being worked on.
Dr Paul endorsed him because he and Dr Paul had many conversations and Jim worked hard on the Ron Paul campaign here in NH.
If you have specific questions you can email Jim I am sure he would be happy to talk to you.
I went to his website months ago (Oct.?) and it has not changed.
I live in NH. Have not heard or seen a single word on this guy.
BTW The NH official campaign was amateur at best. The grassroots "unofficial" was awesome. Best in the primary.
I would love to support a real libertarian in the mold of Dr. Paul. If they are not in line with RP on the Iraq war, and foreign policy in general, then they are of no interest to me.
I agree
Based on this person's web page, I would never vote for him. All he has to say is, spending and taxes should be lower (many people already in Congress already SAY that) ... and then he talks about the perils of national security, how we need to be more careful checking tourists with student visas.
For a tourist, US immigration is a bigger pain in the a** than just about any other country in the world. We charge non-refundable $200 application fees for Visas (if we reject a tourist, we still KEEP their money! Name another country that treats tourists that way) ... we ask for fingerprints, mugshots, etc.
In summary, we already treat guests who want to visit this country like crap, so it seems like making this process even more rigid is a non-starter. The only other countries that have "terrorist" problems at or near the levels that we do, are Israel and the United Kingdom. We should be figuring out how to get rid of the factors causing security problems. It clearly isn't that we "aren't tough enough at the borders" since all other countries in the world do not have these rigid inspections of foreign visitors.
well said
Thank you. A lot of people talk about protecting our boarders, but what people don't seem to think about is the fact that people don't choose where they are born. If somebody wants to come to America to make their life better, they should be welcomed with open arms as long as they don't just want to take welfare. They shouldn't be treated like crap by some government agents and be charged non-refundable fees that most of them can't afford exactly because of the poor situation that they want to come to get away from. People wonder why people cut through that crap by coming illegally? If it wasn't so expensive and difficult, more people would come to America legally.
common sense people!
I agree with Ron Paul supporters on most things, but this mentality of wanting to make it more difficult for people to come to America just amazes me.
Donating like always Im
Donating like always
Im Starting a .com please donate $1
http://widget.chipin.com/...
Guess you should
elaborate - even for $1!
Why...?
Why would not a mere $500,000 fund a very credible campaign for a Presidential Candidate in New Hampshire?
Congratulations to Mr. Jim Forsythe!
Who Governs the Governless?
bump
Dont forget to help out Albert Howard. He is still here fighting the state of NH and is running low on $$$$$$
Incorrect post
I hate to point out a technicality (well not really), but Ron Paul has also endorsed Murray Sabrin who is running in New Jersey for Senate. Many people mistakenly use Congress to be synonymous with House of Representatives. That simply is not true. The Congress includes both the House and Senate.
fixing
yeah.. I realized that after I posted it.. will change that right now.
www.ronpaulhq.com
www.jimforsythe.com
check this web
for Jim directly at www.jimforsythe.com. This one does work.
Thank You ........ Roben
that url doesn't work.
i
im in
im in
RP Supporters need this to Wake Up America
RP Supports need to be educated and learn the truth of this government of ours and will give us more of a reason to fight to get people to open their eyes to why RP needs to be elected.
The more ammo we have in educating people to wake them up, the more sucessful we'll be. So please listen to following audio that was on this morning at RBN;
http://216.240.133.177/ar...
Then read the " The Strecker Memorandum ' at
http://www.guerrillafunk....
The people need to " WAKE-UP " to realize what's being done to them and why RP needs to be elected.
And I hope/pray you can take this website back!!
RP Supporters need to help BBV - For RP to be Elected
we can help " http://www.blackboxvoting... "...
If we don't help them, RP can be cheated this November.
The following is an e-mail I got today from BBV:
The video below provides bits of the backstory for our discovery of a potentially devastating method of rigging MAIL IN VOTES, AUDITS and RECOUNTS. Black Box Voting is currently doing proof of concept testing on our "Theory of a crime" and will release details next week on how it's done, so that preventive measures can be put in before November. We'll see how the ballots and the special "optical scan marking pens" being sold by vendors actually perform in our tests. Any information you can provide on the specific paper stock and especially, the paper coatings used by ballot printers will be much appreciated right now.
Information leading up to this discovery came from a frame-by-frame analysis of video, including these:
http://www.youtube.com/wa... (pay close attention to the last segment)
and
http://www.youtube.com/wa...
We believe it is possible to undetectably alter thousands -- possibly tens of thousands -- of paper ballots, using a technique known as "check washing." This would require applicator bottles (for ballot alteration in a vehicle during transport), paper towels, and in central ballot storage locations, for large quantities, cans of odorless paint thinner, denatured alcohol, or acetone. Our upcoming tests will show if our theory is correct, whether it can be done in a van, how many ballots can be done per hour, whether the special "AccuVote marking pens" sold by LHS Associates and Diebold (Premier) are easier to "wash" for remarking.
These two "ELECTION REALITY TV" videos above are prequels; video of our demo will be released next week. Maybe our theory of a crime won't work. We'll see.
The new video, linked above, shows top-level New Hampshire state officials lying about chain of custody matters. In one particularly bizarre incident, they attempt to hide the fact that ballots are sitting right there in an area of the warehouse (at 5:20 pm) that they have emphasized is "closed" at 4:30 pm. When a citizen catches them on video in the "closed" area, they simply deny that the ballot boxes are ballot boxes!
Earlier, they had staged a bit of public theatre in which they made it a point that "Hoppy" of the Butch and Hoppy ballot transport team, will have trouble going back to get his bag because the area is "closed" at 4:30. But after dark at 5:20, a Connecticut citizen named Walter Reddy caught top state officials and Hoppy on film in the very area that was supposed to be "closed", and the next night at 6:54 pm, a Florida citizen named Jeannie Dean caught them again.
Apparently the state officials did not realize the ballot boxes (empty and otherwise) had been caught on video, and after saying "those are not ballots" they hurriedly turned out the lights! Imagining state-level public officials standing there in the dark would be comical if it didn't represent the rape of our democratic republic.
The same boxes identified as "NOT ballots" are later identified, on camera, as Rockingham County ballot boxes, by the same state official who claimed they weren't ballots the night before. Of course, we knew they were ballot boxes, because we followed the ballot pickup van during Rockingham County pickups!
So what did they do? Open it up and deal with ballot intake and chain of custody in a properly public and transparent fashion?
Nope. The next night, New Hampshire state officials engaged the services of a police dog to obstruct citizens from looking in the window -- aROOH-ROOH-ROOH! (Nice doggy.)
Sarasota citizen Jeannie Dean, teeth chattering in the frigid New Hampshire night, zoomed in with a camera and boosted the sound on her video and once again, caught 'em in the act of secretive ballot delivery in the dark, wandering around in areas already proclaimed "closed after 4:30 pm."
"They" included New Hampshire Deputy Secretary of State David Scanlan, New Hampshire Archives Director Frank Mevers, Archives Records Manager Brian Burford, and of course, "Butch and Hoppy" -- Armand "Butch" Dubois and Peter "Hoppy" Falzone.
A public records request by Black Box Voting for documents pertaining to the assignment of the K-9 unit has elicited "There are no records." We asked for phone bills, New Hampshire officials have said it will take 90 days to find them. We have asked for checks, credit card receipts, etc. for cleaning supplies, paint thinner, smocks, latex gloves, etc. They say it will take 90 days to find them. (Or find which ones to purge? Guys: We have your stuff on video.)
Much of what I've just told you relates to next week's proof of concept testing. What you will see in THESE videos is the backstory that helped us figure out the mechanics of how a massive ballot-tampering operation could be accomplished with just a few key people.
This project, funded and produced by BLACK BOX VOTING, used the concept of a rolling calvary of experienced citizen voting rights leaders. We collaborated on video targets and shared our videotape. Using combined evidence captured by several different citizens were we able to piece together how the New Hampshire primary could have been stolen.
CHAIN OF CUSTODY AND VOTE SUBSTITUTION: Along with voter eligibility fraud tactics and computer tampering, these will be "all the marbles" this November for mail-in votes (Oregon, Washington: nearly 100 percent; California, Arizona: approx 50 percent; Ohio, New Mexico, approx 30 percent.) Chain of custody and vote substitution can defeat any manual spot-check and, as we saw in New Hampshire, can nuke the validity of any recount.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO SECURE ELECTIONS?
YES. Citizen controls! "Get it right on Election Night." This is not about "bipartisan" observers who are political party operatives and hacks. This is about CITIZEN CONTROLS. Because the instruments of government that we have created, and our votes -- our method of exercising control over the government that we have created -- belong to US, not "them" -- not the government, not political parties. US. U.S. We the People.
AND NOW, ABOUT THOSE COMPUTERS...
Following another investigation, requiring months of diligence and plenty of computer and public records experience, JIM MARCH, JOHN BRAKEY, MICHAEL SHELBY: Maricopa County Arizona have produced an in-depth citizen evaluation: http://www.bbvforums.org/...
The article above provides the overview for a number of issues discovered in the largest location in Arizona, the most systemic -- national in scope -- being their discovery of an illicit component in the Sequoia voting system. Pay special attention to Appendix A in the full report: http://www.bbvdocs.org/se...
* * * * *
And as for the many locations that still use paperless DREs or fail to audit chain of custody and procedural safeguards, as they say in New York, "fahgeddaboudit." There is no reason whatsoever to trust those elections.