This will take some patience if folks want to sort/sift through all of this, and I hope several of you will. I believe this may get at the nub of it. All of this may be inside the bounds of technical legality, but it certainly stinks and is outside the bounds of ethics.

They key to voter manipulation appears to be what is referred to in the video below as micro-targeting. Dan Rolle speaks about it with respect to the Nevada primary in 2008 about which Clinton sued in that year - he describes how the Obama campaign out-maneuvered her at that time. I'm adding to what he's presented my own recollection of circumstances and facts as we've seen them play out in the past year and a half or so.

Dan Rolle has had his own very personal stake in paying attention to Nevada politics because he ran in the Nevada Democratic primary for the 4th Congressional District (he lost).

Dan tells us that Robby Mook learned that the secret to stealing elections is in Big Data.

I realize the video appears to be of a rather crazy person, but cha'all know how all of us are feeling after having been bamboozled to whatever degree each of us is. My take on this is that he may be a bit of a flake, and he's certainly taxed, but there are portions of this video which appear to tie together HOW exactly the corruption was effectuated in the spring. He rambles for a full three minutes before he actually gets into the background for his story - I recommend sticking with it, I believe he's got the bones of the story correct:

This is my account of what Dan tells us - perhaps I'm not getting it quite right, and I'd appreciate more sets of ears to help me hear what I'm missing... I'm adding in other information I remember or am drawn to search for given the directions this information points...

Dan begins by explaining that in 2008, Hillary's campaign did not have much access to data, so it was easy for Obama's people to out-pace (his word) the Clinton people because his campaign had their own data through all the sophisticated ways Obama's folks were capturing data by supporters signing up for him on his website and twitter feed and where ever else they collected supporter info. According to Dan's story, THIS is what was at the core of Obama's path to victory. (This )piece from The Guardian talks a bit about how the Obama campaign used Facebook to network in 2012 based on their work in 2008.

Moving ahead to 2016, Dan claims that Debbie Wasserman Schultz was able to use her position at the head of the DNC to tap into state voter files in a way which had apparently not been done previously. As a reminder, Debbie played a substantial role Hillary's campaign in 2008, so we know she went into the DNC position with an agenda of getting Clinton the nomination, and we've seen the Wikileaks display of what went on there over the past year or so (exactly NONE of which was refuted, of course).

The state parties use a service called NGP Van for tracking voter information - if you scroll down to the bottom of that page, you'll see the leadership of the organization. Here's a one-sentence explanation of the service NGP Van provides (source):

The voter file is a powerful database for Democratic campaign teams because it brings information related to registered voter's past voting history, their address and contact information all in one place.

This is an ad NGP Van has to describe their services:

Stu Trevelyan is CEO. His bio on the NGP VAN site does not give us as much info as the page I linked to his name... and here is a line we may all find relevant from the second bio:

Before starting CTSG, Stu worked directly on a number of campaigns, including working in the 1992 Clinton-Gore "War Room," and then in the Clinton White House.

In other words, he's had a direct relationship with the Clintons since the 1992 campaign.

Just ahead of minute 6 in the video, Rolle asserts that the NGP Van VoteBuilder software could override local and sate voter information including removing people from the voter list and changing voter status to inactive (which essentially removes their eligibility to vote in elections until their registration is updated - something which is difficult to take care of on election day and would require a voter to vote provisionally if they are lucky - not all states/localities make it possible to fix eligibility in time for those votes to be counted).

It seems worth noting that Justin Lewis who is Director of Design for NGP Van is touted as someone who "built key tech infrastructure for the 2008 Barack Obama campaign."

How does one get big data, Rolle asks. His answer: you steal it from the state NPG Van databases.

Before moving forward, I'd like to remind folks that NPG Van is not the only big data hawker on the Clinton team. EVEN BIGGER than NPG Van is Google, and affiliated The Groundwork.

This is NPG Van's page of press clippings for anyone who wants background.

Here's an article from New York Times which is NOT included on the NGP Van press page but which came up for me when I searched under Stu's name and Hillary Clinton: Democrats and Bernie Sanders Clash Over Data Breach. I'm sure you all remember the story as reported.

The webpage where I found this (fireandreamitchell.com) looks questionable, but the sentence I'm taking from it is correct to the best of my memory:

Trevelyan’s NGP Van issued a software patch that briefly shut down the firewall and “briefly opened a window into proprietary information from other campaigns.”

Also on the fireandreamitchell.com page is a tweet which can no longer be accessed publicly:

Just a coincidence that Stu Trevelyan, CEO of NPG Van is a supporter of the Clinton Campaign? pic.twitter.com/LXxtfgeYgC

-Sam Rosenblum (@samrosenblum) December 18, 2015

Here's Jeff Weaver talking about the breach from the NYT link above talking about his concern that Bernie's campaign data was compromised:

I am unaware that the results of the independent audit of the two events was ever made public. I remember the Sanders campaign saying the results of the review confirmed that they did not steal any data.

Here's more general info on NGP Van from

What is NGP Van, the Tech Firm at Center of Democratic Primary Dispute?

This POLITICO piece about the role Elan Kriegel plays in the Clinton campaign where he is director of alalytics:

To understand Kriegel’s role is to understand how Clinton has run her campaign — precise and efficient, meticulous and effective, and, yes, at times more mathematical than inspirational. Top Clinton advisers say almost no major decision is made in Brooklyn without first consulting Kriegel. He was one of her first hires and is among her highest-paid, and yet he remains virtually unknown outside the cloistered community of political number-crunchers. “I can’t think of anybody who has as much impact as Elan who has as little name recognition with the national press,” said Stu Trevelyan, CEO of NGP Van, which manages the voter file used by every major Democratic campaign, and who has worked with Kriegel for years.

(snip)

When Clinton operatives talk about their “data-based” campaign, it’s invariably Kriegel’s data, and perhaps more importantly his models interpreting that data, they are talking about. It was an algorithm from Kriegel’s shop — unreported until now — that determined, after the opening states, where almost every dollar of Clinton’s more than $60 million in television ads was spent during the primary.

The tool bypassed the expertise and instincts of her traditional media buyers by calculating the “cost per flippable delegate,” in the words of one senior Clinton official, and then spat out what states, television markets, networks and shows to buy. Obama veterans were wowed by its advancement; internally, some Clintonites saw it as their secret weapon in building an insurmountable delegate lead over Bernie Sanders.

Let's get back to Rolle's video. He makes a point of saying that he knows what he knows because he ran for office. At the time he ran, he was told that the state voter registration information is crap, but that candidates can access it for free from the state. To get similar information from NGP Van, he had to pay $15K. At about minute 9, Rolle discusses how he feels NGP Van is not as good as another piece of software (NationBuilder), but the reason he claims the Dems use NGP Van is because it is set up to allow the Dems to sell the information they collect (so that both NGP Van and the Dems make money off the sale). As he says, "they can track you right down to your house - they can tell whom you're going to vote for."

At minute 10, Rolle asserts that Robbie Mook was getting feedback from donors that if Hillary did not win Nevada that they would cease their donating. Rolle believes that Nevada was a pivotal state this season. At that time, he claims (and this is consistent with what I remember hearing at the time) that 70% of the new voters who were registered in Nevada ahead of the primary caucuses were registering to vote for Bernie.

Earlier in the video, Rolle had explained that Clinton sued about At-Large caucus sites which are created for Nevada service workers who work strange shifts - here's info about that from Wikipedia (where we learn that it wasn't technically the Clinton campaign which sued):

In addition to the 1,754 neighborhood caucus locations, nine at-large caucus locations were available for shift workers who could not return to their home precincts to caucus. These at-large precincts were at the Wynn, Bellagio, The Mirage, Paris Las Vegas, New York-New York, Flamingo, Caesars Palace, and The Rio, all located in Clark County.[6] Workers who worked within 2.5 miles (4.0 km) of the caucus site, were scheduled to work during or within one hour of the caucus period, and those who had an employer ID showing their employment in the zone were permitted to attend. Unlike regular caucuses where delegates are apportioned based on registered voters, the at-large locations were allocated based on attendance, which caused controversy...

(snip)

In an attempt to block nine at-large caucus precincts from being held on the Las Vegas Strip, the Nevada State Education Association and six Las Vegas area residents filed a 13-page lawsuit on January 11, 2008. The at-large sites were created to facilitate the caucus participation of casino workers, and others working within 2.5 miles (4.0 km) of the Strip, but the plaintiffs said that these sites would both elect more state delegates than others and violate state election law.[12] While the suit was not officially supported by any presidential campaign, the fact that it was filed two days after the Culinary Workers Union Local 226 endorsed Obama and that several of the State Education Association's leaders endorsed Clinton led some political commentators to describe it as a proxy battle between the two campaigns...

Here's more from The Guardian:

The race between the rivals turned bitter last week after a teachers' union tried to use the courts to block specially-convened caucuses for casinos and hotel workers on the strip. The Obama camp accused the Clinton campaign of engineering the suit after it won the endorsement of the culinary union. In turn, the Clinton campaign accused the union of telling workers they could only go to the caucuses if they would support Obama. The Obama camp then countered with Spanish language radio ads, paid for by the parent union of the culinary workers, which accused Clinton of trying to disenfranchise casino workers. "Hillary Clinton does not respect our people," the ad said.

The same story also has this about Bill Clinton's electioneering in that cycle (similar to what he did in Mass this cycle):

Saturday's caucuses got under way with some voters alleging strong-arm tactics by the culinary union to force them to support Obama. However, the Clinton camp was not above flexing its own muscle. Bill Clinton spent his morning visiting the casinos on the Las Vegas gambling strip where some caucuses were held.

At the Mirage casino, where uniformed chamber maids, dealers, and cocktail waitresses in skimpy outfits gathered in a lone line, the former president hovered at the entrance to the caucus site, telling voters they were free to defy their union.

So, we know for sure that Nevada had a bloody primary in 2008. Rolle tells us his theory of how NVDems strong-armed their way through the local caucuses (and state convention by extrapolation). He tells us that there was cheating in the At Large caucuses (the same ones which had been challenged in court in 2008) by recruiting caucus-goers through the unions, specifically people who had not registered to vote.

From the Wikipedia page referenced above, we learn that there is same-day registration for caucusing:

The Nevada Democratic Caucus was open to all voters who would be 18 by November 4, 2008, regardless of party affiliation. Republicans, unaffiliated voters, and members of other parties could change their registration at the door, and new voters could register as well.

I'm not in Nevada, so I'm not familiar with how things are done there. Technically, it appeared to me that Rolle may be at least partially incorrect to call this 'cheating' if the NVDems allow same-day registration. It may be fancy-footwork, but on the face of it, it appears to be legal. But there's more, and if true, can only be called cheating. Observer Politics covered this story and here's a quote they got from Rolle:

“I met with Nevada Democratic Party executive board members who told me they were aware of caucus members being bussed in from California,” Rolle told the Observer, noting there were significant discrepancies with the Nevada Democratic Party’s voter file. “When I pressed on the accuracy in the voter file, I was told ‘it’s garbage’ by an executive board member.”

So, if California residents (i.e. NOT Nevada residents) were bused in to participate, THAT would be illegal. And if the assertion in two videos here is correct and people voted in the caucus who were never registered at the event (Dore's video is especially compelling), THAT is also illegal. So, in at least these examples, Rolle appears to me to have credibility in what would otherwise by crazy statements.

Rolle claims that Caucus results were announced BEFORE the counts of caucus votes were completed. His twitter feed, he claims, has testimony from party members who attest to this being the case.

Rolle speaks quite a bit about weight he says is thrown around by Harry Reid which I'm not well versed in, and I'm agnostic because of my ignorance about the claims Rolle is making. In brief, Rolle appears to believe that if either Sanders or Trump were elected that Reid would be either prosecuted or humiliated - I don't know enough about the back story to get into it, but Reid has a stake in seeing Hillary elected. Suffice it to say that Rolle claims Reid is deeply involved with the Unions in Las Vegas so that he can mobilize their strength. And so says the New York Times from 2/18/16:

Harry Reid Wants Las Vegas Casino Workers at Nevada’s Caucuses

LAS VEGAS — Senator Harry Reid of Nevada has had discussions with the head of the state’s most powerful union to make sure tens of thousands of casino workers can easily participate in the Democratic caucuses here on Saturday.

In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Reid said he had spoken to D. Taylor, the president of the parent union of the Culinary Workers Union, which has 57,000 members, more than half of which are Latino. The union wields enormous power in the state and declined to endorse a presidential candidate this year.

“He’s been extremely cooperative,” Mr. Reid said. “Probably 100 organizers will be at the caucus sites and in hotels to make sure people know what they’re doing.”

And this is from Observer Politics about Rolle's assertions:

Former Democratic Congressional Candidate Says Hillary Stole Nevada

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid played a major role in tipping the Nevada caucuses in favor of Hillary Clinton. Reid, who maintained neutrality until shortly after the caucuses—at which point he endorsed Clinton—called in favors to casino owners, asking for workers to be sent to caucus sites in Las Vegas. “If Harry Reid is going to push the needle with union workers going to the polls (on paid time), Nevada is the state to do it,” Rolle added. The Culinary Workers Union, for example, did not intend to participate in the Nevada caucuses—until a call from Reid to the union’s leader changed their mind.

Following the caucuses, 64 of Sanders delegates were rejected at the Nevada State Democratic Party Convention by a board chosen by Clinton. The delegates would have given Sanders an edge. Roberta Lange, the state party’s chair, denied a recount of delegates and ended the convention at her own discretion, therefore breaking the party’s own rules to ensure Clinton received more delegates from Nevada than Sanders.

This video from Rolle's twitter feed claims to be of Union members being admitted to a caucus site WITHOUT BEING REGISTERED (and one can hear audio of someone explaining that these people will be registered 'later.'):

And here is a video of TYT's Jimmy Dore reporting on the same story (although I'm not clear if this is the same or another caucus location):

I haven't seen (nor have I looked for) any validation of this assertion, but it's disturbing - the claim is that Hillary is pronounced the winner before the caucuses are complete:

For those of us still there one more bit: @HillaryClinton's acceptance speech. While we were still caucusing. pic.twitter.com/m9REjk9oVi

— dan rolle (@danrolle) September 19, 2016

In another video, Rolle claims that candidate Lucy Flores helped to legitimate the bogus story about chairs being thrown at the Nevada Democratic State Convention. As you may recall, Bernie endorsed Flores, so when she confirmed chairs were thrown by Bernie supporters, the media felt that was an objective verification.

And .@LucyFlores literally deals Sanders the death blow by helping to spread a lie about his supporters. https://t.co/SJefcakSSz #dncleak

— dan rolle (@danrolle) September 19, 2016

Tweet of Alice Walton's contribution to NV Dems for HVF

But here is the big leak. Contribution to .@nvdems earmarked for Hillary Victory Fund. Come on @rlange9. Get real. pic.twitter.com/rgGM9m7cK4

— dan rolle (@danrolle) September 18, 2016

For those of us who do not know him, why might Dan Rolle be believable? We've certainly seen how a zany story was manufactured in Nevada about chair-throwing (and all the violent Bernie Bros) at the state convention. (For perspective on how the story was confabulated and spread, see Counterpunch).

At the very least, we know that screwy things have happened in Nevada this year and in the previous election cycle with Hillary, and there are some good clues as to why Nevada may seem pivotal to her and may have played a major role in the eyes of her donors.

What I am missing to feel confident about this story is two pieces of information. The first we won't ever have, which is whether information about Bernie voters was obtained by Hillary's campaign during one or the other (or both) of the periods when NGP Van had the firewall between the two campaigns down. Weaver seemed to believe information was stolen from the Sanders campaign - this was why they were busy documenting the breach (and were subsequently blamed for exploiting it). The second is Rolle's assertion that the NGP Van data is somehow able to be override state voter registration information. The theory is that if Hillary's camp was able to ascertain who Bernie were very likely motivated Bernie voters (either from their own research of from stealing data from Bernie's campaign), that they could then, essentially, de-register those voters so that they were ineligible to vote when they showed up at the polls (by removing them entirely, by switching their party affiliation so that they could not participate in closed Democratic primaries, or by rendering their registration inactive).

But we do have ONE example (not cited by Rolle) of an elections staffer in New York who purged a very large number of voters who had no reason to believe they should have been unable to vote in the primary, and there does appear to be evidence of bribery in this particular case. In other words, we have an example of something similar happening, but not by the method Rolle seems to suggest:
Top NY Election Official Ousted for Purging Over 125,000 Brooklyn Voters

Haslett-Rudiano reportedly skipped a step in normal procedure to prevent the removal of eligible voters when conducting a periodical purge of voters who had either died or moved away. This error resulted in the removal of nearly 8 percent of Brooklyn’s registered voters.

Clinton won Kings County, which houses Brooklyn, by 57,909 votes on Tuesday night.

Haslett-Rudiano’s dismissal comes on the heels of New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s announcement of an official investigation into how New York City officials mishandled the election.

There is speculation that a real estate purchase from Haslett-Rudiano in 2014 was a payoff to her:

Upper West Side Eyesore Sells for Millions

Owner of Once Elegant Brownstone, Beseeched to Fix Up the Place, Paid $5,000 in 1976

For decades along West 76th Street, neighbors watched with mounting alarm as a vacated brownstone, traces of its 19th-century glory still etched into in its facade, fell into deeper and deeper disrepair. The front stoop's brownstone banisters crumbled, floors collapsed and stonework cracked

Now the Upper West Side property has been sold by $6.6 million to a developer who plans to restore it as a single-family mansion, brokers say.

Who bought the property?

Barely a year before those voter purges began, Rudiano was involved in a real estate transaction with powerful Clinton allies that netted her an astonishing 1,003 percent profit. In September 2014, Rudiano sold a brownstone that she had bought for $5,000 in 1976 for $6.6 million. The property, which included collapsed floors, crumbing bannisters and cracked stonework, was bought by an investment group called Holliswood 76, LLC.

Who runs Holliswood? That would be Dana Lowey Luttway, a developer and daughter of U.S. Congressman Nita Lowey. Weeks after that real estate transaction went through, Lowey endorsed Hillary Clinton for President.

Congressman Lowey is a long-time Hillary Clinton friend and political ally. Lowey is also a Superdelegate to the Democratic National Convention and has pledged her support to Hillary Clinton.

It's an awful lotta coincidences to go along with some super shady behavior. We are unlikely to get irrefutable proof of anything ahead of November 8th, and voting has already begun in many states - Ballots by Mail have already begun to be sent out in many states.

There are two pieces of information I have been following this year which dovetail with Rolle's story which tend to support it for me. The first is that at least in my state, this year the Dem party has broken with recent tradition in that funding for the coordinated campaign is substantially different this year than it has been in the past. In the past few election cycles, the person at the top of the ticket - either the presidential or gubernatorial nominee- has contributed the bulk of the funds toward the local coordinated campaigns for the election season. Not so this year. Team Hillary seems to be sort of sponsoring a few key candidates, and the rest are at the mercy of what the County party decides to invest in the coordinated effort.

This separation between the presidential campaign and the coordinated campaign seems especially odd this year given that all the brouhaha about the joint fundraising effort of Hillary Victory Fund (referenced in the tweet about Alice Walton's contribution). I could go on a very long explanation about HVF, but suffice it to say that Hillary's campaign has been claiming that she's helping the down ballot races through coordination with the state parties in the partnership of HVF. Best evidence out there makes it appear that it's a one-way street rather than two - that the campaign is exploiting the state parties as vehicles for bringing in dollars the campaign and the DNC could not legally land on their own. Those monies are momentarily landed in the state campaign bank accounts and are then instantly transferred to the DNC by a member of Hillary's campaign (link).

As I looked for clues that HVF monies were actually going to assist down-ballot candidates and state and local parties, mostly what I found was abstractions. What was most firm was that monies were going to be invested in the voter databases, i.e., NGP Van. Here's a statement from one of the Wikileaks DNC emails where the Sanders camp makes such a claim:

Sanders' campaign has criticized Clinton's use of the joint fundraising committee, arguing that it has been used to build her donor email lists and direct mail campaigns and evade more restrictive individual limits during the primary. Clinton's campaign says it has followed the rules and the money will help Democrats up and down the ballot.

For a good primer on Hillary Victory Fund read: How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

More on the Dan Rolle/Nevada Election Fraud story from Inquisitr - video of Roberta Lange (Roberta's Rules) from the state convention is there. Another Inquisitr story on this topic.

If you're interested in more information about NGP Van's VoteBuilder, there's a video at this link.