As establishment politicos like Sen. Sherrod Brown say they are "fed up" that Bernie Sanders is not conceding the election, it is interesting to note the things Brown has not said he is "fed up" with. In reaction to the news that Sanders and Trump have agreed to debate, after Hillary Clinton backed out of a debate with Sanders in California, senators like Brown, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, and Gary Peters of Michigan expressed frustration that Sanders was not "winding down the primary" or being "considerate."

Ironic, then, that not one of them expressed anger at how inconsiderate it is that 90,000 votes in Brooklyn, Sanders' hometown, will not be counted, even though the primary was so flawed that two NYC election officials have been suspended without pay, and multiple investigations are in progress. Sherrod Brown has expressed no indignation that hundreds of thousands of registered Democrats in Brooklyn were wrongly dropped from the rolls.

Nor is Brown "fed up" that there are no fewer than seven active, official investigations at various levels open on primaries in the states of New York, Arizona, and Kentucky, a half-dozen lawsuits filed in California, New York, Arizona, Illinois, and Massachusetts, and serious irregularities, often captured quite openly on camera, in Nevada, Iowa, and Wyoming. Every one of the incidents in question benefitted Hillary Clinton, and throws the validity of the primaries into doubt.

How can dropping "entire buildings and blocks of voters from the voting lists" in Brooklyn, in the words of NYC Mayor Bill De Blasio, benefit Hillary Clinton? The cleverness, and moral bankruptcy, of the Clinton forces has no bounds. A Brooklyn Bernie supporter wrote on a Facebook post that large parts of Brooklyn are practically "Millennials City" and "If there were anyplace to strip entire blocks and buildings full of likely Sanders voters from the roles, Brooklyn would be the place to do it."

Such carefully crafted, at first blush innocuous "incompetence" is the hallmark of the Democratic primary season, the word used by oh-so-coy election officials as a figleaf for fraud ("What me cheat?") At other times, a standard bludgeon is required, like that wielded by Nevada party chairman Roberta Lange, who declared the recent state convention adjourned, after ramming through rules on contested voice votes which preserved Clinton's "win" in the caucuses, which was being questioned.

Roberta's Rules are: Sometimes you just do what you gotta do.

In Maryland, the results of the primary in Baltimore have been decertified, after the state election administrator found that in some precincts, the number of ballots cast was higher than the number of check-ins. Maryland is now conducting a precinct by precinct review of the numbers.

In short, no one really knows exactly how many pledged delegates Hillary will walk into the convention with. The only thing clear is that Donald Trump got it close, but not quite, when he announced Hillary's new name would be "Crooked Hillary." The name Clinton deserves, and which should be hung around her consistently throughout the convention, is "Cheating Hillary."

There is no need to guess if it is true. No need to fear it isn't fair. A citizens' audit group in Chicago told the Chicago Board of Elections, in an open meeting and on camera, that they witnessed vote totals being tampered with to benefit Hillary Clinton. To date no federal investigation of what would be criminal violations of federal election law has been announced.

It is not necessary to rehash all of the sordid evidence and all of the open investigations here. Researchers better than I have already done it. AntiMedia.org's Claire Bernish does an admirable job in her run-down of 2016 Democratic primary cheating, and the blog Election Fraud 2016 spins out the shenanigans in even greater detail.

In a strong indication that what we have seen may be the tip of the iceberg, math wonks will enjoy Richard Charnin's painstaking analysis of exit polls, which were wrong all the time in a way that suggest that Bernie was robbed, in 24 out of 26 primaries. Even though they were right all the time within a mere point or two on the Republican side. To understand how unlikely that is, unless something else was at work, that is as likely as a coin toss coming up heads 24 out of 26 tosses.

Funny, the new finding that, although exit polls have been accurate enough in elections around the world for the UN to use as flags for fraud, somehow they have a built-in bias against non-establishment candidates in the Democratic Party in the US in 2016. It has been suggested that Hillary's older population which uses early voting explains it. But New York, where the pattern is pronounced, has no early voting.

So pronounced was the pattern suggesting fraud that even non-mathematician actor Tim Robbins felt compelled to say something, despite sure attacks for the apparent Hollywood Liberal Subversive Goddamn Longhair views which drive one to say the emperor has no clothes, and two plus two is four.