Topic: Diebold

A 2004 clip features Congressman Jerry Nadler discussing the hackability of Diebold electronic voting machines on the Charlie Rose show. Nadler argued that "honest glitches" and secret instructions could steal millions of votes without a paper trail. He advocated for legislation requiring a physical receipt for every electronic vote to ensure election integrity.

Pieczenik dismisses the idea that Russia interferes in U.S. elections, stating that American politicians and corrupt voting machinery are the real threats. He characterizes the focus on Putin and Jared Kushner as irrelevant, arguing that the U.S. has more internal corruption than any foreign power could exploit. He emphasizes that U.S. and Russian intelligence services actually work closely together on counterterrorism.

The mechanics of modern voting involve touchscreens that produce a human-readable paper strip, which is then scanned by a second machine. Concerns are raised about the "air bridge" between these computers and where the data goes after scanning. The discussion recalls past controversies involving Diebold machines and the potential for upstream vote manipulation in the digital tabulation process.

The Washington Post has warned that Russian hackers could target U.S. voting machines by November. The hosts express skepticism, noting that concerns about Diebold machines have existed for years without significant action. They advocate for a return to paper ballots and simple ink-based verification to ensure election integrity.

Reports of widespread voter disenfranchisement in the New York Democratic primary surface after Hillary Clinton's victory. Allegations include the purging of 150,000 voters from lists in Brooklyn, malfunctioning Diebold voting machines, and poll workers providing conflicting information to Bernie Sanders supporters.

Thom Hartmann reported on Russia Today that an eighth-grader could hack Diebold electronic voting machines for $26. Hartmann suggested that "hacktivist" groups like Anonymous could exploit these vulnerabilities to skew Republican primary results in favor of Ron Paul. The hosts interpret this as a "Red Book" narrative designed to delegitimize a potential Ron Paul victory by blaming it on hackers.