The Grim Future (?)

Ohio recount volunteers allege tampering and more

2005-01-30T17:20:00.000-06:00

‘Why were there stickers on ballots in Clermont County, Ohio?’

By Larisa Alexandrovna | RAW STORY Staff

Serious new election tampering allegations have emerged from an Ohio county, where witnesses allege that stickers were placed on presidential election ballots, RAW STORY has learned.

Several volunteer workers in the Ohio recount in Clermont County, Ohio have prepared affidavits alleging serious tampering, violations of state and federal law and possible fraud. They name the Republican chief of Clermont’s Board of Elections Daniel Bare and the head of the Clermont Democratic Party Priscilla O’Donnell as complicit in these acts.

These volunteers, observing the recount on behalf of the Greens, Libertarians and Democrats, assert that during the Dec. 14, 2004 hand recount they noticed stickers covering the Kerry/Edwards oval, whereas the Bush/Cheney oval seemed to be “colored in.”

Some witnesses state that beneath the stickers, the Kerry/Edwards oval was selected. The opti-scan ballots were then fed into the machines after the hand recount.

Allegations of ballot tampering in Ohio – which decided the outcome of the presidential election by some 100,000 votes – find particular resonance in Clermont, one of three Ohio counties which saw the biggest increases in votes for Bush from 2000 to 2004. The other counties were Butler and Warren; Warren County had a lockdown after an alleged terror threat that the FBI later denied.

These counties “increased their support of Bush by only a few percentage points each,” the Cincinnati Enquirer reported Monday. “But in the raw numbers of votes, they made the difference.”

In a sworn affidavit, Clinton County Democrat Stephen Spraley, a retired plumber from Springboro, Ohio, saw the stickers on at least ten opti-scan ballots. Spraley brought this issue to the attention of Deputy Director for the Clermont Board of Elections, Kathy Jones, who is a Democrat. He says he was rebuffed by the Republican Director of the Board of Elections Daniel Bare.

House Judiciary Democrats Request Hearings on Election Irregularities

2005-01-20T01:27:00.000-06:00

January 19, 2004

The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner
Chairman
Committee on the Judiciary
2138 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Dear Mr. Chairman:

We write to you at the very outset of the 109th Congress, to request that our committee hold hearings and investigate the vital issue of protecting our citizens right to vote. The right to vote is the very foundation of our Democracy and is at the core of our Committee’s jurisdiction, and we can think of no more important or urgent issue before us than protecting our democratic rights. While the election is settled, however, our job as legislators on the Judiciary Committee to make sure that the constitutional right to vote is protected is just beginning.

In congressional forums many of us participated in Washington D.C. and Columbus, Ohio, we learned of significant voter irregularities in Ohio. These irregularities are included in a 100 page report Mr. Conyers issued, and include the following:

• The misallocation of voting machines led to lines of ten hours or more that disenfranchised scores if not hundreds of thousands of predominantly minority and Democratic voters. In Franklin County, 27 of the 30 wards with the most machines per registered voter showed majorities for Bush, while six of the seven wards with the fewest machines delivered large margins for Kerry.

• The Ohio Republican Party’s decision to engage in preelection “caging” tactics, selectively targeting 35,000 predominantly minority voters for intimidation had a negative impact on voter turnout. The Third Circuit found these activities to be illegal and in direct violation of consent decrees barring the targeting minority voters for poll challenges.

• The Ohio Republican Party’s decision to utilize thousands of partisan challengers concentrated in minority and Democratic areas disenfranchised numerous legal voters, who were not only intimidated, but became discouraged by the long lines in the adverse weather. Shockingly, these disruptions were publicly predicted by Republican officials: Mark Weaver, a lawyer for the Ohio Republican Party, admitted the challenges “can’t help but create chaos, longer lines and frustration.”

• Numerous instances of intimidation and misinformation occurred across the state of Ohio that would appear to violate the Voting Rights Act. For example, the NAACP stated that it received over 200 calls regarding incidents of suspected voter intimidation or unusual election related activities, particularly actions taken by challengers who intimidated poll workers and voters. Other specific incidents involved a caller who reported that someone was going door-to-door telling people they were not registered to vote. A voter in Franklin County received information in the mail identified as being from the state that said he would have to vote by provisional ballot because he had moved; in fact, the voter had not moved and had lived at the address for 10-15 years. One polling place worker was reportedly only asking African American voters for their address.

• In Franklin County, a worker at the Holiday Inn observed a team of 25 people who called themselves the “Texas Strike Force” using payphones to make intimidating calls to likely voters, targeting people recently in the prison system. The “Texas Strike Force” members hotel accommodations were apparently paid for by the Ohio Republican Party, whose headquarters is across the street. The hotel worker heard one caller threaten a likely voter with being reported to the FBI and returning to jail if he voted. Another hotel worker called the police, who came but did nothing. There were also reports of phone calls incorrectly informing voters that their polling place had changed.

• The Cleveland Plain Dealer found that several Lake County residents received an official-looking letter on Board of Elections letterhead informing them that their polling place had changed or that they were not properly registered to vote. A fake voter bulletin from Franklin County Board of Elections was posted at polling locations, and fliers were distributed in the inner city, telling Republicans to vote on Tuesday and Democrats to vote on Wednesday due to unexpected heavy voter registration.

• In Cleveland, the Washington Post reported that unknown volunteers began showing up at voters’ doors illegally offering to collect and deliver complete absentee ballots to the election office. The Election Protection Coalition testified that in Franklin County, voters received fliers informing them that they could cast a ballot on November 3. Also, in Franklin County there were reports that about a dozen voters were contacted by someone claiming to be from the county board of elections, telling them their voting location was changed, and “door-hangers” telling African-American voters to go to the wrong precinct were distributed.

In our view, this course of events is not consistent with the right to vote as we understand it. The fact that many of these instances appear to be focused particularly on minority voters is all the more disheartening, and triggers even more clearly our jurisdiction involving civil rights.

We look forward to full and open hearings concerning these instances of disenfranchisement in Ohio and around the Nation. We very much would like to work with you and your staff to insure that allegations of improprieties by both Democrats and Republicans are looked into and considered.

Report suggests changes in exit poll methodology

2005-01-19T14:12:00.000-06:00

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Exit polls overstated John Kerry's share of the vote on November 2, both nationally and in many states, because more Kerry supporters participated in the survey than Bush voters, according to an internal review of the exit-polling process released Wednesday.

The report said it is difficult to pinpoint precisely why, in general, Kerry voters were more likely to participate in the exit poll than were Bush voters. "There were certainly motivational factors that are impossible to quantify," the report said.

Problems with the numbers first surfaced on Election Day, when exit polls showed Kerry with a 3-point lead nationally and an edge in some key battleground states. Those exit poll results were leaked and became widely known through the Internet.

CNN did not air those inaccurate results or post them on its Web site, and CNN's projections of winners on election night were accurate.

Nationwide, Bush got about 3.5 million more votes than Kerry.

The discrepancies stemmed from problems in interviewing voters at the 1,480 randomly chosen precincts where exit pollsters were stationed, not from how those precincts were selected or the way the data were processed, according to the 75-page report.

The report recommends a number of steps to deal with the problem, including better training for interviewers, as well as continued research aimed at boosting participation in the polls.

The report was issued by Mitofsky International and Edison Media Research, the polling firms that conducted the polls on behalf of the so-called National Election Pool, a consortium of six national media organizations (AP, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC).

To prevent leaks in future elections, the news organizations have agreed not to access the data until 6 p.m. ET.

The report found that the exit polls offered no evidence of widespread fraud.

"Exit polls do not support the allegations of fraud due to rigging of voting equipment. Our analysis of the difference between the vote count and the exit poll at each polling location in our sample has found no systematic differences for precincts using touch screen and optical scan voting equipment," the report found.

The new report shows that exit polls overstated Kerry's support in 26 states, while estimates overstated Bush's support in four states. The problem is not new -- in every presidential election since 1988, exit polls have overstated support for Democrats nationally -- but the discrepancy in 2004 was more pronounced than in previous years.

The report identified several factors that may have contributed to the discrepancy, including:

Distance restrictions from polling places imposed upon the interviewers by election officials at the state and local level.
Weather conditions, which lowered completion rates at certain polling locations.
Multiple precincts voting at the same location as the precinct in the exit poll sample.
Interviewer characteristics, such as age, which were more often related to the errors last year than in past elections.
The pollsters said they plan to further investigate the recruiting and training procedures, the interviewing rate calculations, the length and design of the questionnaire, as well as characteristics of both the interviewers and the precincts chosen to be surveyed.
"Even with these improvements, differences in response rates between Democratic and Republican voters may still occur in future elections," the report reads. "However, we believe that these steps will help to minimize the discrepancies."
In addition to the information included in this report, exit poll data from this election are being archived at the Roper Center at the University of Connecticut and at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan and will be available there for review and further analysis. A description of the methodology of the exit polls is posted at www.exit-poll.net.
From 1990 to 2002, exit polls were conducted by Voter News Service (VNS), whose exit polls in 2000 led to the networks' decisions to declare Al Gore the winner in Florida. In 2002, VNS was unable to deliver any exit poll data to the networks, resulting in the decision to disband it.

Ohio AG Seeks To Sanction Attorneys Over Vote Challenge

2005-01-19T13:38:00.000-06:00

COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro has asked the Ohio Supreme Court to sanction four lawyers who handled a legal challenge, later withdrawn, to last year's presidential election in Ohio.

The motion targeting Clifford Arnebeck, Robert Fitrakis, Susan Truitt and Peter Peckarsky was filed Tuesday on behalf of Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio's top elections official, said Kim Norris, spokeswoman for Petro.

The motion said the 37 protesters filed a "meritless claim" for "partisan political purposes" and said "a contest proceeding is not a toy for idle hands."

"Instead of evidence, (the lawyers) offered only theory, conjecture, hypothesis, and invective," Petro's office wrote. It said the challenge was filed "only for partisan political purposes."

Arnebeck called the motion frivolous. He said his clients "put in a great deal of evidence in the form of affidavits and sworn testimony."

He accused Blackwell of "stonewalling" and refusing to answer questions as requested in his December court filings.

The challenge was withdrawn last week, with those contesting the election saying it was clear they would be dismissed as moot with Bush set to be inaugurated Thursday.

Ohio's 20 electoral votes went to Bush, who won the state by 118,000 votes over Democratic Sen. John Kerry.

And With That. . .

2005-01-06T16:37:00.000-06:00

. . .The Future is Indeed GRIM!

Thanks to Senator Barbara Boxer and Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones for at least trying to shed some light on the numerous issues with the election of 2004! It shows there is *some* hope of things getting better. Also thanks to the other represenatives who stepped up in support:

Corrine Brown, FL
Julia Carson, IN
William Clay Jr., MO
James E. Clyburn, SC
John Conyers Jr., MI
Danny Davis, IL
Lane Evans, IL
Sam Farr, CA
Bob Filner, CA
Raul Grijalva, AZ
Doc Hastings, WA
Maurice Hinchey, NY
Jesse Jackson Jr, IL
Sheila Jackson Lee, TX
Eddie Bernice Johnson, TX
Stephanie Tubbs Jones, OH
Carolyn Kilpatrick, MI
Dennis Kucinich, OH
Barbara Lee, CA
John Lewis, GA
Ed Markey, MA
Cynthia McKinney, GA
John Olver, MA
Major Owens, NY
Frank Pallone JR, NJ
Donald M. Payne, NJ
Jan Schakowsky, IL
Bennie Thompson, Miss.
Maxine Waters, CA
Diane Watson, CA
Lynn Woolsey, CA

As well as those Senators who were in support of Senator Boxer.

Congress Formally OKs Bush Election

2005-01-06T16:33:00.000-06:00

WASHINGTON - Congress certified President Bush)'s re-election Thursday but only after Democrats forced a challenge to the quadrennial count of electoral votes for just the second time since 1877.

Bush's Election Day triumph over Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., was never in doubt. After a near four-hour delay to consider and reject the dispute over voting in Ohio, lawmakers in joint session affirmed Bush's 286-251 electoral vote victory — plus a single vote that a "faithless" Kerry elector cast for his running mate, Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.

In a drama that was historic if not suspenseful, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, and Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., formally protested that the Ohio votes "were not, under all known circumstances, regularly given." That, by law, required the House and Senate to convene separately and hold separate debates on the Ohio irregularities.

Boxer, Tubbs Jones and several other Democrats, including many black lawmakers, hoped the showdown would underscore the missing voting machines, unusually long lines and other problems that plagued some Ohio districts, many in minority neighborhoods, on Nov. 2.

Other Senators preparing to support Sen. Boxer in electoral challenge

2005-01-06T13:40:00.000-06:00

As many as eight senators ‘to support Boxer in challenge’

Sources on Capitol Hill have told RAW STORY that other senators are preparing statements of support to deliver when Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) challenges Ohio’s electoral votes today.

Several sources indicated that additional senators are not likely to sign the challenge, possibly at the request of Sen. Boxer and Rep. Tubbs-Jones. MSNBC’s Countdown program suggested as many as half a dozen senators might join Sen. Boxer.

According to Jesse Jackson, who announced the news at a D.C. rally, among those who are expected to speak in support of Boxer are Senators Clinton, Obama, Reid, Durbin and Dodd.

Boxer said Thursday afternoon at a press conference that there may be as many as eight. She said she had not spoken with Sen. Kerry about the challenge.

(Continued)

Democrats to Force Debate on Ohio Results

2005-01-06T13:37:00.000-06:00

A group of Democrats on Thursday planned to interrupt Congress' ceremonial counting of the electoral votes that gave President Bush his re-election victory and force the House and Senate to debate Election Day problems in Ohio.

The challenge does not jeopardize Bush's November win over Sen. John Kerry. But it does legally compel lawmakers to interrupt their formal count of the Electoral College vote — only the second time since 1877 that the House and Senate were forced into separate meetings to consider electoral votes.

The joint session began as required by law at 1 p.m. EST, with Vice President Dick Cheney presiding as the Senate's president and about 100 lawmakers present. One by one and in alphabetical order, each state's electoral votes were read aloud.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., signed a challenge mounted by House Democrats to Ohio's 20 electoral votes, which put Bush over the top. By law, a protest signed by members of the House and Senate requires both chambers to meet separately for up to two hours to consider it. Lawmakers are allowed to speak for no more than five minutes each.

"I have concluded that objecting to the electoral votes from Ohio is the only immediate way to bring these issues to light by allowing you to have a two-hour debate to let the American people know the facts surrounding Ohio's election," Boxer wrote in a letter to Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, a leader of the Democratic effort.

The action seems certain to leave Bush's victory intact because both Republican-controlled chambers would have to uphold the objection for Ohio's votes to be invalidated. Supporters of the drive said that rather than changing the election outcome, their hope was to shine a national spotlight on the Ohio voting problems.

(Continued)

Executive Summary: House Judiciary Dems’ final report on Ohio election problems

2005-01-05T13:35:00.000-06:00

Text: Executive Summary of Conyers’ Ohio election report

The following is the text of the Executive Summary written by the House Judiciary Democratic staff about election problems in Ohio’s November presidential election, and is the crux upon which Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) is seeking to contest Ohio electoral votes and open a discussion of the election on the Senate floor Jan. 6. The report was published Wednesday, and the text released to RAW STORY by the Judiciary staff.

The full document in PDF format can be found here.

Executive Summary

Representative John Conyers, Jr., the Ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, asked the Democratic staff to conduct an investigation into irregularities reported in the Ohio presidential election and to prepare a Status Report concerning the same prior to the Joint Meeting of Congress scheduled for January 6, 2005, to receive and consider the votes of the electoral college for president. The following Report includes a brief chronology of the events; summarizes the relevant background law; provides detailed findings (including factual findings and legal analysis); and describes various recommendations for acting on this Report going forward.

We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousand of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards.

This report, therefore, makes three recommendations: (1) consistent with the requirements of the United States Constitution concerning the counting of electoral votes by Congress and Federal law implementing these requirements, there are ample grounds for challenging the electors from the State of Ohio; (2) Congress should engage in further hearings into the widespread irregularities reported in Ohio; we believe the problems are serious enough to warrant the appointment of a joint select Committee of the House and Senate to investigate and report back to the Members; and (3) Congress needs to enact election reform to restore our people’s trust in our democracy. These changes should include putting in place more specific federal protections for federal elections, particularly in the areas of audit capability for electronic voting machines and casting and counting of provisional ballots, as well as other needed changes to federal and state election laws.

With regards to our factual finding, in brief, we find that there were massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio.

(Continued)

House Dems to Contest Electoral Vote Count

2005-01-05T09:53:00.000-06:00

A handful of House Democrats plan a long-shot effort to snarl President Bush's formal re-election by preventing Congress from counting Ohio's pivotal votes when lawmakers tally the electoral vote on Thursday.
No one expects the action to undo Bush's victory. Instead, it seems likely to do little more than call attention to Election Day voting irregularities, a growing frustration for Democrats who blamed similar problems in Florida for Bush's 2000 defeat of Democrat Al Gore.

In a measure of the dispute's political delicacy, proponents are considered unlikely to find a senator who will co-sign the objection, which is required to force Congress to act on the challenge. Most Democrats are reluctant to launch a serious effort to undo the election, in which Bush outpolled Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., by more than 3 million votes nationally.

Even so, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., has sent letters to senators seeking their support for his plan to object to the counting of Ohio's 20 electoral votes, which gave Bush his November victory over Kerry. Some Ohio voters have complained of Election Day fraud, citing a shortage of voting machines at precincts with minority voters, unusually long lines and computer problems.

"I am hoping that you will consider joining us in this important effort to debate and highlight the problems in Ohio which disenfranchised innumerable voters," wrote Conyers, top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee.

The House Democrats' chief hope of finding a supportive senator may be Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. Her spokesman, David Sandretti, said Tuesday that she has been asked to sign the complaint "and she is considering it."

Bush won the 2004 election by 286 to 252 electoral votes, with 270 required for victory. By law, the House and Senate will meet Thursday in joint session to tally the states' electoral votes.

Should a senator and House member formally challenge a state's results, the two chambers must meet separately and consider the objection. That scenario would still ensure Bush's re-election because both bodies are controlled by Republicans.

(Continued)

Ohio Republican Secretary of State brags about delivering Ohio for Bush in gubernatorial fundraising letter

2005-01-05T01:01:00.000-06:00

Ohio’s Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell boasted of helping “deliver” Ohio for President Bush and said he was “truly pleased” to announce Bush had won Ohio even before all of the state’s votes had been counted in his own fundraising letter, RAW STORY has discovered.

The letter, which was received by a Butler County resident Dec. 31, is a plea to support Blackwell’s campaign for governor. The resident has asked to remain anonymous.

In apparent disregard for his nonpartisan role as Ohio’s chief election official, the Republican Secretary and chairman of Bush’s Ohio reelection campaign slammed Senator Kerry as a “disaster” who would have reaped “terrible” and “horrible” results on both Ohio and the United States.

Further, Blackwell’s use of the word “deliver” finds striking resonance with another controversial fundraising letter sent by the CEO of voting machine manufacturer Diebold Walden O’Dell in the summer of 2003 when he said he was “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.”

Blackwell’s campaign office confirmed that they that sent the letter but offered no further comment.

(Continued with scan of letter available as well. . .)

Bush Asks Judge to Toss Ohio Election Suit

2005-01-04T02:08:00.000-06:00

COLUMBUS, Ohio - President Bush's re-election campaign asked the chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court on Monday to throw out a challenge of the election in this swing state, saying the case resembles "a poorly drafted script for a late night conspiracy-theory movie."

The court filing was made as the Rev. Jesse Jackson held a rally before hundreds of people in Columbus to support the challenge and urge the U.S. Senate to debate Ohio's results on Thursday when Congress is in joint session for the official tally of the electoral votes.

Thirty-seven Ohio voters who filed the challenge are asking Chief Justice Thomas Moyer to set aside the election results. Some of the voters are suspicious of Bush's victory over Sen. John Kerry, while others say hours-long waits in heavily black neighborhoods caused voters to leave in frustration without casting a ballot.

"In 2000, if Al Gore had just held on and fought to the bitter end, he would have been president," said Mark Lomax, a black Columbus musician challenging the vote. "I kind of have the same feeling now — whether or not you like John Kerry, that's not the issue. It's just that your vote counts."

Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell said there's no reason to prolong the election.

"Jesse Jackson can complain, grandstand, whine, stamp his feet all he wants," said Blackwell spokesman Carlo LoParo. "It's not going to change the results of Ohio's election or how voters cast their ballots on Nov. 2."

The Bush campaign echoed those sentiments in the filing, saying the challenge falls "far short of a legitimate election contest."

It is not known when the chief justice might rule on the challenge.

Bob Fitrakis, one of the lawyers who filed the challenge, said that if Moyer's decision comes after the tally by Congress, it likely wouldn't have any effect on the outcome of the presidential election. But any ruling favorable to the challengers — regardless of when — would bolster their efforts to improve voting law, he said.

Some national exit poll data leaked

2005-01-02T16:35:00.000-06:00

Some national exit poll data from the presidential and other election races on Nov. 2 have been leaked online.

Others in prominent positions are in the process of vetting the data for any useful and/or relevant information, RAW STORY has learned. This site hopes to provide further context over the days to come, but for now the data can be viewed at Scoop.co.nz.

(Continued)

US looking to 'rig' Iraqi elections???

2004-12-29T02:31:00.000-06:00

Iraq's election body rejected a suggestion in Washington it adjust the results of next month's vote to benefit the Sunni minority if low turnout in Sunni areas means Shi'ites win an exaggerated majority in the new assembly.

Speaking of "unacceptable" interference, Electoral Commission spokesman Farid Ayar said: "Who wins, wins. That is the way it is. That is the way it will be in the election."

(Continued)

Kerry moves to preserve Ohio recount evidence

2004-12-28T13:54:00.000-06:00

On Monday afternoon, Kerry-Edwards' state counsel for Ohio filed a motion in to preserve evidence related to the state's presidential recount, RAW STORY has learned. Specifically, the motion seeks to preserve all ballots and voting machines for investigation and analysis, and to make a Triad Election Systems technician available for a sworn deposition. Triad had previously been accused of tampering with voting machines in Ohio.

(Continued)

Ohio Recount Ends, Shows Votes Closer

2004-12-28T13:16:00.000-06:00

Election officials finished the presidential recount in Ohio on Tuesday, with the final tally shaving a few hundred votes off President Bush's six-figure margin of victory in the state that gave him a second term.

The recount shows Bush winning Ohio by 118,457 votes over John Kerry, according to unofficial results provided to The Associated Press by the 88 counties. Lucas County, where Toledo is located, was the last to report its results Tuesday.

The state had earlier declared Bush the winner by 118,775 votes and planned to adjust its totals to reflect the recount later this week.

The Kerry campaign supported the recount, but said it did not expect the tally to change the election winner. Supporters of the recount, requested by two minor party candidates, said they wanted to make sure that every valid vote was counted.

Ohio and its 20 electoral votes tipped the race to Bush when Kerry conceded the morning after the vote.

Ohio Official Refuses Interview Over Vote

2004-12-27T22:45:00.000-06:00

Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell has requested a protective order to prevent him from being interviewed as part of an unusual court challenge of the presidential vote.
Blackwell, in a court filing, says he's not required to be interviewed by lawyers as a high-ranking public official, and accused the voters challenging the results of ``frivolous conduct'' and abusive and unnecessary requests of elections officials around the state.

Citing fraud, 37 people who voted for president Nov. 2 have challenged the election results with the Ohio Supreme Court. The voters refer to irregularities including long lines, a shortage of voting machines in minority precincts and problems with computer equipment.

President Bush defeated John Kerry by 119,000 votes, according to the official count by Blackwell. Ohio's 20 electoral votes gave Bush the 270 he needed for victory. Kerry conceded the morning after Election Day.

(Continued)

Voting Problems in Ohio Spur Call for Overhaul

2004-12-23T23:42:00.000-06:00

By JAMES DAO, FORD FESSENDEN and TOM ZELLER Jr.

COLUMBUS, Ohio, Dec. 22 - William Shambora, 53, is the kind of diligent voter who once assumed that his ballot always counted. He got a rude awakening this year.

Mr. Shambora, an economics professor at Ohio University, moved during the summer but failed to notify the Athens County Board of Elections until the day before the presidential election. An official told him to use a provisional ballot.

But under Ohio law, provisional ballots are valid only when cast from a voter's correct precinct. Mr. Shambora was given a ballot for the wrong precinct, a fact he did not learn until after the election. Two weeks later, the board discarded his vote, adding him to a list of more than 300 provisional ballots that were rejected in that heavily Democratic county.

"It seems like such a confused system," said Mr. Shambora, a John Kerry supporter who blames himself for the mistake. "Maybe if enough people's votes had counted, the election might have turned out differently."

From seven-hour lines that drove voters away to malfunctioning machines to poorly trained poll workers who directed people to the wrong polling places to uneven policies about the use of provisional ballots, Ohio has become this year's example for every ailment in the United States' electoral process.

With a state recount expected to be completed next week, few experts think the problems were enough to overturn President Bush's victory here. And many of the shortcomings have plagued elections for decades.

But with the 36-day Florida recount of 2000 proving that every vote counts and with the two major parties near parity, the electoral system is being scrutinized more closely than ever. Election lawyers and academics say Ohio is providing a roadmap to a second generation of issues about the way the nation votes.

Congressional passage of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 - which mandated the provisional ballot as a failsafe and provided states money to update voting technology - was considered a landmark overhaul that would help prevent another Florida.

(Continued)

Video Supporting Ohio Vote Fraud Claim Revealed

2004-12-23T14:55:00.000-06:00

Truthout has come into possession of video from Hocking County, Ohio. The video was recorded by a documentary film crew that was reporting on the Ohio election. The crew interviewed a technician from Triad Systems.

Triad Systems Had Remote Access to Voting Machines

2004-12-23T14:51:00.000-06:00

The ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) issued a followup letter to the president of Triad Election Systems Thursday, noting that he had confirmed that Triad Election Systems had remote access to voting machines controlled by local Board of Elections. . .

(Continue to see scans of letter)

Kerry to Enter Ohio Recount Fray

2004-12-23T13:26:00.000-06:00

By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Report
Thursday 23 December 2004

2004 Democratic Presidential candidate John Kerry will file today, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, papers in support of the Green Party/Libertarian Party recount effort. Specifically, Kerry will be filing a request for expedited discovery regarding Triad Systems voting machines, as well as a motion for a preservation order to protect any and all discovery and preserve any evidence on this matter.

Triad Systems has come under scrutiny recently after Sherole Eaton, deputy director of elections for Hocking County, swore out an affidavit in which she described her witnessing the tampering of electronic voting equipment by a Triad representative. Rep. John Conyers, the ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, has requested an investigation into this matter by the FBI and the Hocking County prosecutor.

Truthout will have more on this specific Triad allegation later in the day.

Previously, the Green Party and Libertarian Party have not fared well in their efforts to get emergency orders regarding this matter in Ohio. In order to pass muster with a judge, the individual or group requesting an emergency order for such a recount must show both irreparable harm as well as a substantial chance for success on the merits. While Green and Libertarian representatives have been able to show irreparable harm, they could not establish a substantial chance for success on the merits, because no recount would deliver Ohio to either party.

Kerry's entry into this recount effort changes the math on this matter dramatically. He can likewise show irreparable harm, and unlike the Green and Libertarian candidates, he can also prove a substantial chance for success on the merits because he lost the Ohio vote by a statistical whisker.

It should be noted that Kerry's filing of these requests does not indicate his complete entry into the recount process, but does clearly indicate that he is moving decisively in that direction. His previous stance on the matter was based simply on his desire to defend the right to have a recount in the first place. The evidence of election tampering in Ohio, specifically surrounding Triad, has motivated him to actively join the fight. The Democratic Party is also quietly putting financial resources into the Ohio recount effort.

Perhaps the most significant aspect of all this, from the activist point of view, has been the effectiveness of the telephone calls and letters to Kerry. The activist push to get him involved had a very significant effect on his decision to enter this effort. Likewise, calls to other Senators in order to convince them to join House members in challenging the election have likewise had significant effect. If such an effort continues, the activists involved will very likely see the desired result unfold.

Conyers blasts election firm over "cheat sheets"

2004-12-23T13:23:00.000-06:00

The ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) issued a stinging letter to the president of Triad Election Systems Thursday, remarking that he had "more questions and concerns than ever" after viewing a tape of Triad's visit to the Hocking County Board of Elections Dec. 20.

(Continued)

The Long Shadow of Jim Crow: Voter Intimidation and Suppression in America Today

2004-12-23T01:56:00.000-06:00

A Report by PFAW Foundation and NAACP

In a nation where children are taught in grade school that every citizen has the right to vote, it would be comforting to think that the last vestiges of voter intimidation, oppression and suppression were swept away by the passage and subsequent enforcement of the historic Voting Rights Act of 1965. It would be good to know that voters are o longer turned away from the polls based on their race, never knowingly misdirected, misinformed, deceived or threatened.

Unfortunately, it would be a grave mistake to believe it.

(Continued)

Ohio Vote Suppression Videos Show Numerous Issues

2004-12-23T01:10:00.000-06:00

We have come across some amazing footage of various issues Ohio voters experienced on election day. This footage was provided by Free Speech Zone

Ohio Voter Suppression Videos

File One: WMV Video 1 [8 MB]

File Two: WMV Video 2 [3.2 MB]

The following is the press release to accompany the videos:

GROUP RELEASES VIDEO FOOTAGE OF ‘JIM CROW LIKE’ CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN OHIO ON ELECTION DAY

An emerging coalition of civil rights, pro-democracy groups, and disenfranchised voters challenge US election’s legitimacy. Unprecedented Constitutional confrontation continues to escalate

View just released video footage here: http://oneblockover.net/dropbox/

A 25-minute video was made available to the press and public today that exposes the widespread civil rights abuses and voter disenfranchisement suffered by the African American community in Franklin County Ohio on Election Day. The footage was released by "We Do Not Concede" (www.donotconcede.com), a nonprofit grassroots organization created to unite and mobilize citizens whose voting right were suppressed, denied, or simply not counted.

"We hope this footage will serve as a wake up call to all Americans that the fundamental principles our country was founded upon like ‘democracy’ and ‘equal rights’ are being systematically dismantled by a small group of Republicans who are concerned with keeping power, not preserving liberty," said Zack Kaldveer, Communications Director, We Do Not Concede. "In America every vote must be accurately counted and equally valued, and that’s not what happened on November 2nd. We the people most definitely do not concede."

The video provides a first hand glimpse of an emerging civil rights scandal of historic proportions that will culminate in a "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" bus trip organized by We Do Not Concede, consisting of voters who are contesting the Ohio electorate, led by Rev. Bill Moss of Columbus Ohio. The buses will travel from Columbus to Washington DC on January 4^th through the 6^th. Rev. Jesse Jackson has pronounced Ohio's vote fraud fiasco "the biggest deal since Selma" and has called for a national rally at "the scene of the crime" in Columbus January 3^rd.

"For the second Presidential election in a row African-American voters have been subjugated to the role of second class citizens through efforts by Republicans to suppress, intimidate, and disenfranchise our vote," said Rev. Bill Moss, original Contestant of Ohio Electors and founder of the Center for Freedom and Justice. "Whether its Katherine Harris or Kenneth Blackwell, the purpose is the same: do everything in their power to ensure George W. Bush becomes President. If they are willing and able to thwart democracy and abuse the civil rights of American voters right in the face of the press and public, what else are they capable of? I am contesting this election because tyranny, particularly in the guise of democracy, is our civic duty to fight."

The footage details what transpired in heavily leaning Democratic precincts throughout Franklin County on Election Day, including unexplained voting machine shortages, organized campaigns directing voters to the wrong polling places, malfunctioning voter tabulation equipment, election worker confusion and incompetence, and a host of other problems. However, as detailed in an official affidavit by Richard Hayes Phillips, a geomorphology Ph.D. from University of Oregon, the extent of voter disenfranchisement was systematic and widespread in African American precincts throughout the state. Dr. Phillips sworn testimony (http://web.northnet.org/minstrel/supreme.htm) read:

"It is my professional opinion that John Kerry's margins of victory were wrongly reduced by 22,000 votes in Cleveland, by 17,000 votes in Columbus, and by as many as 7,000 votes in Toledo. It is my further professional opinion that John Kerry's margins of defeat in Warren, Butler, and Clermont Counties were inflated by as many as 37,000 votes in the aggregate, and in Miami County by as many as 6,000 votes. There are still 92,672 uncounted regular ballots that, based upon the analysis set forth of the election results from Dayton and Cincinnati, may be expected to break for John Kerry by an overwhelming margin. And there are still 14,441 uncounted provisional ballots."

Kenneth Blackwell, Ohio’s Secretary of State, as was the case of Katherine Harris, Florida’s Secretary of State in 2000, simultaneously served as Bush’s campaign Co-Chair, raising serious conflict of interest issues. These concerns were only compounded by the fact that in each case, both Blackwell and Harris were accused of making decisions that seemingly twisted voting regulations to benefit the election of George W. Bush, and both stymied recount and investigation efforts seeking to determine the true will of the voters.

"We must not succumb to tyranny and rationalize that imperfection in voting irregularities and suppression tactics are reasonable expectations. They are not," said Butch Wing, Director, Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, Silicon Valley. "Too many world-changing events have hinged on one vote for us to be cavalier when thousands are systematically disenfranchised. This system of 50 separate and unequal state elections must give way to the fulfillment of the American promise, which requires an amendment to the Constitutional affirming the individual right to vote, federally protected, and an even playing field for all Americans."

Sworn testimonies submitted to Rep. John Conyers "voter forums" investigating the tens of thousands of complaints regarding the legitimacy of the election have brought to light mountains of evidence that point in one direction: Bush’s "victory" in Ohio is highly dubious, and therefore so too is his electoral college total and the established view that he should continue to serve as President. In fact, lawsuits filed by Ohio voters, Common Cause, the Alliance for Democracy, the ACLU, the Green Party, and the Libertarians have already protested the official results of Election Day.

Among the findings uncovered by Rep. Conyers investigation are (see detailed statistical analyses of Ohio anomalies at http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1012):

Fewer voting machines were available in low-income precincts, creating lines of up to 10 hours, people never received their absentee ballots, polling places were moved at the last minute, voters were sent to the wrong polling places, and many were illegally removed from voter lists and had to fill out provisional (that weren’t counted) ballots.

Only four of the 77 precincts that were extremely crowded on Election Day due to voting machines being subtracted were Republican. While some voters waited in long lines to cast a ballot, the Franklin County elections board left 39 voting machines unused on Election Day.

South Concord managed a 98.5% turnout heavily tilted toward Bush; but a Cleveland precinct that was heavily tilted toward Kerry managed just a 7.1% turnout.

In Miami County 19,000 votes came in after all precincts had voted, with a 2:1 margin for Bush.

Exit polls, specifically in Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio were all wrong and outside of the margin of error. Statisticians say there is a 180-million-to-one chance for this sequence of exit polling disparities to have occurred.

Election officials in Warren County alerted staff on the Thursday before the election that there would be a Homeland Security alert on Election Day — and then took the ballots to a warehouse for a secret count which resulted in a 14,000 vote increase for Bush from his 2000 total.

Dr. Norman Robbins of Cleveland testified that over 10,000 voters in Cuyahoga County alone were disenfranchised by various means, and that nearly all were "youth, poor and minorities." In one Cleveland ward, he said, 51% of the provisional votes cast were thrown in the trash, virtually all of them from African-Americans.

Votes seem to have been added to Bush’s total, or in many cases, taken away from Kerry and added to the totals of other Democratic candidates further down the ballot. C. Ellen Connally, an African-American candidate for Ohio Chief Justice, who was little known and outspent in the southern part of the state, received hundreds of thousands of more votes than Kerry.

Another major national demonstration will take place in Washington DC on January 6, as Congress ratifies the Electoral College.

Ohio Chief Justice Moyer Lays Groundwork for Suit's Dismissal

2004-12-22T19:45:00.000-06:00

Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer, a Republican who was re-elected on the same ballot as President George W. Bush Nov. 2 but has declined to recuse himself from a suit contesting the president's election, issued a motion and procedural ruling today that denies an expedited hearing in the case and lays out the framework by which he might dismiss the case. RAW STORY acquired the ruling Wednesday afternoon.

(Continued)

Ohio: A Crime Against Democracy

2004-12-22T15:20:00.000-06:00

By Stuart Comstock-Gay / Tom Paine

The Bush electors in Ohio have cast their votes, even though the bitterly contested ballots that allegedly gave them standing as electors have not been recounted. When asked, the mainstream media will admit that there were rampant problems with this election. But there's no juicy story for them to cover because they don't believe a recount would change the outcome of the election. Thus, they neglect what's happening in Ohio. Here Comstock-Gay explains why it matters. For the best of TomPaine.com's coverage of the problems with election 2004, click here.

Stuart Comstock-Gay is executive director of the National Voting Rights Institute.

Electoral votes have been submitted by all states and the national news media has moved on, but a test of U.S. voting rights continues in Ohio. After the Ohio delegation to the Electoral College cast its votes for President Bush last week, election officials in Ohio counties began the recount of votes cast in the election. Concerns about the integrity of the 2004 election continue to surface. Something's wrong with this picture.

We at the National Voting Rights Institute—on behalf of Green Party Candidate David Cobb and Libertarian Party candidate Michael Badnarik—are providing legal representation in the recount effort. We also want to find out what went wrong. Because clearly things went wrong. And whether in the end they are serious enough to change the outcome of the election, they create a cloud over the elections of 2004.

Too many commentators continue to claim the recount effort is the result of bad losers. Some have even gone so far as to say that if the Republicans lost, there would be no recount—that Republicans “play fair.” In fact, concern about "fairness" is in part what is driving the recount. These commentators overlook the fact that this effort is not only about verifying the outcome of the vote. More importantly, it’s about ensuring accountability of a highly fallible elections process.

As long as any votes are miscounted, misplaced or misdirected, our elections cannot be said to be properly working. And with an electoral system that provides no consistency in how votes are counted—and some election officials hostile to a full accounting— there remains work to be done to restore voters' faith in the system.

What Went Wrong On Nov. 2

The number of complaints in Ohio numbers thousands upon thousands—lines into the hours at polling places; shortages of poll workers and machines; electronic voting machines that malfunctioned; voters being required to show identification even though they were not first-time mail-in registrants; erroneous purges of voters from the voter rolls; and voters who requested absentee ballots but never received them and were nevertheless barred from voting in person. In one precinct in Franklin County, Ohio, an electronic voting system gave George W. Bush 3,893 extra votes out of a total of 638 votes cast. In addition, approximately 93,000 ballots were not counted and Ohio election officials may have improperly disqualified thousands of 155,000 provisional ballots cast.

Now the problems are escalating. In Hocking County, Ohio, Deputy Elections Director Sherole Eaton describes a troubling incident on December 10, three days before the recount was to begin. An employee of the Tri Ad company came into the office to check out the tabulator and computer and prepare voting officials for the recount, so that “the count would come out perfect and we wouldn’t have to do a full hand recount of the county.” He asked which precincts would be recounted, and made sure to focus on them. Voting machine expert Doug Jones from the University of Iowa believes this threatens the integrity of the entire recount. Now Congressman John Conyers has asked the FBI to investigate this incident.

What’s Going Wrong With The Recount

But that’s only the tip of the iceberg. With the recount underway, we learn that counties are handling the process in different ways, depending on the whims of county officials. Every county was instructed by the Secretary of State to do a recount of 3 percent of the votes, followed by a hand recount of every vote if there any discrepancy appears. Some counties, however, have said they would do their recounts by machine only, and not by hand. Some have made space for observers, and allowed them to review voting polls and other materials. Some counties have kept observers—whether from the Green Party, Libertarian Party, DNC or Republican Party—out of the counting rooms entirely.

And this only after some elections officials tried to stop the recount in its tracks. Delaware County sued NVRI, Cobb and Badnarik, seeking to stop the recount, even though the law was followed. He said the recount was too expensive and frivolous. Delaware County has finally decided to conduct a recount, but only after a series of hearings.

On January 5, Congress will receive the votes of the electoral college votes and the election—for all intents and purposes—will be considered concluded.

Meanwhile the Ohio recount will continue well into January. As of this writing, results are not in, but we expect full recounts in most counties.

It is shocking that the cherished right to vote, which should be a major issue in this country, has become an invisible one. Even in the Ukraine, there will be a new election because of widespread irregularities in the presidential election. As the Supreme Court stated over a century ago, the right to vote is "a fundamental political right, because preservative of all rights." Now, more than ever, we must fight for this right.

Wrong John Kerry Gets NY Electoral Votes

2004-12-22T14:03:00.000-06:00

WASHINGTON - Even John Q. Public knows the middle initial of losing presidential candidate John F. Kerry. But New York's 31 electoral college votes are currently on the books for some guy named John L. Kerry.

State officials acknowledged the mistake Tuesday after the official "certificate of vote" appeared on the Web site of the National Archives.

The document was sent to officials and archivists in Washington and Albany, N.Y., as well as to Columbia University in New York, before the error was spotted.

"The ballots were correct, but for some reason with this document when it was typed up, nobody caught it in the proofing, including myself," said Peter Constantakes, spokesman for the New York Department of State.

The state is now rushing corrected copies to those who received the document, he said.

Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry carried New York as the Democratic nominee for president, but lost the nationwide election to President Bush.

How Democrats Enabled Republicans To Steal the 2004 Presidential Election

2004-12-22T08:30:00.000-06:00

By J. F. Miglio

Since the presidential election, there have been hundreds, perhaps thousands, of stories on the Internet (and even a few in the mainstream news media) about voter fraud and how easily the 2004 presidential election could have been rigged by the Bush Administration and their corporate allies, Diebold and ES & S, the companies in charge of counting a majority of all the votes in American today.

What isn't being discussed, however, is the Democratic Party's complicity in this year's presidential election farce. If you recall, after the 2000 presidential election, Democrats claimed they were madder than hell about voter fraud, reiterating ad infinitum how the Supreme Court "stole" the election from Al Gore and vowed it would never happen again.

Given their level of anger and righteous indignation, most Americans who voted against George W. Bush assumed that as soon as he slithered into the oval office, the leaders of the Democratic Party would rush to their desks to write legislation that would remedy the problem of voter fraud-- once and for all.

In addition, the anti-Bush crowd believed that once Democratic leaders wrote the legislation, that if the Republicans in Congress tried to block it, the Democratic leaders would immediately call press conferences, make the rounds on all the news shows, and proclaim to the American public in the boldest way possible how the Bush Administration was trying to block legislation that mandated open and honest elections with fail safe back up systems and paper trails to verify each vote.

Unfortunately, this never happened. Instead, most Democrats (including John Kerry) got sidetracked by 9/11 and the war in Iraq, allowed two years to pass, and then let the Republicans seize the initiative. How? By allowing the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA), a lobbying group representing technology firms like Diebold and ES & S, to push legislation through Congress favorable to their interests. As a result, a bill was written called the Help Americans Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002.

Ostensibly, the bill was a bipartisan piece of legislation that was supposed to ameliorate the punch card voting problems that had plagued the 2000 presidential election by using touch screen vote counting machines. In addition, it was supposed to make the entire voting process fairer and more transparent.

The bill was written by two Republicans, Mitch McConnell and Robert W. Ney (of Ohio-- surprise, surprise!), and two Democrats, Steny Hoyer and Chris Dodd (a "Golden Leash" award-winner for taking special interest money), and it passed overwhelmingly in both houses of Congress, receiving praise from Democrats and Republicans alike. Steny Hoyer even went as far as to refer to HAVA as "the first Civil Rights Act of the 21st Century."

Incredible as it seems, the legislation did nothing to restrict the pervasive control and partisan influence that Diebold and ES & S lorded over the election process, nor did it use language precise enough to mandate that any company that manufactured electronic vote counting machines had to produce a paper trail to verify the authenticity of voter selections.

In essence, HAVA was a complete sham, an extraordinary giveaway to the Republicans, and Diebold and ES & S got exactly they wanted: carte blanche to sell their paperless, touch screen voting machines all over the country. And as soon the Congress shelled out $3.8 billion to state governments for the acquisition of new touch screen voting machines that replaced the old punch card ballots, Diebold and ES & S were there to cash in-- big time!

Once the Democrats realized what a monumental mistake they had made with HAVA, they tried to rectify it. Bob Graham and Rush Holt wrote the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2003, which would have mandated a paper trail for all electronic voting machines. In addition, Hillary Clinton wrote her own bill (although weaker than the Graham-Holt bill) asking for better vote counting procedures. Naturally, both bills were stalled out in committee, and they had no chance of passage before the 2004 election.

And here's the kicker: After the aforementioned bills were presented to Congress, both Chris Dodd and Steny Hoyer, the Democrats who co-wrote the HAVA legislation, opposed the two pieces of legislation introduced by their fellow Democrats that would have given it more teeth.

Now let's do a little critical thinking and ask some obvious questions:

1) Why did Chris Dodd and Steny Hoyer go against their fellow Democrats who proposed legislation that would have strengthened the bill and made it more difficult for companies like Diebold and ES & S to do business? Could it be that they received campaign contributions from ITAA?

2) Why did so many Democrats sign on to the bill in the first place, knowing it did nothing to diminish the pervasive influence of Diebold and ES & S? Didn't they know that both these companies received financial backing from billionaire Howard Ahmanson, an ultra right-wing financier who, over the past several years, has contributed millions of dollars to fundamentalist Christian organizations, the Heritage Foundation, and other right-wing groups in tight with George W. Bush?
3) Is it possible that many Democrats were simply unaware of Diebold, ES & S and Ahmanson? Possible, but if they weren't aware, they should have been, because ever since the 1990s, there were numerous reports about their influence on elections, including a nice little piece in 1996 when Republican Chuck Hagel, who at the time had a major financial interest in ES &S, ran for the U.S. Senate and won "stunning upsets" in both the primaries and the general election.

4) In case Democrats missed that news item, were they also dozing through the 2002 mid-term elections when fellow Democrats, including the enormously popular Max Cleland of Georgia, were losing Congressional elections across the country in which Democrats were ahead by wide margins in the polls, only to lose in "amazing upsets" at the end of the race?

5) Were Democrats also unaware that the word was out that the mid-term Congressional elections were a "trial run" for the upcoming presidential election? And if Diebold and ES & S machines were successful at "counting the votes" to assure Republican victories during the mid-term elections, wouldn't it be logical to assume they would also be successful at counting the votes for Bush in the presidential election?

Finally, if the Democrats knew the answers to these questions, or at least to some of them, then it follows that the DNC and John Kerry knew all along they were entering an election that would be decided not by American voters, but by individuals in charge of counting the votes and individuals in charge of reporting the results of the votes, i.e., Diebold, ES & S, and the corporate-controlled mainstream news media.

Which explains why Kerry threw in the towel so quickly after the election, and why mainstream Democrats didn't challenge the results. The $64,000 question is, if Kerry knew the election was stacked against him from the beginning, why did he bother to run?

This is where it gets really dark and depressing. Go back to the Democratic primary when Howard Dean, the man who said, "I represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party," was ascending faster than a Roman candle at a Fourth of July celebration. Then ask yourself this question: Who torpedoed his candidacy?

Not the Republicans. No, it was the DNC and their friends in the media. And why did the DNC and their friends in the media destroy Howard Dean? Because Dean was portraying himself as a populist who was trying to change the system and make it more equitable for average Americans, an anathema to the financial backers of the Democratic Party, i.e., all the large corporations and special interests that also donate millions to the Republican Party.

And once Dean was destroyed, the Democratic Party power brokers knew they couldn't lose. They knew Kucinich and Sharpton, two other populists, had no chance to win, and the rest of the candidates were all mainstream Democrats who knew their place and would be loyal to the Big Business interests of the party.

But getting back to the question of why Kerry bothered to run if he knew the deck was stacked against him. This is where its gets even darker and more depressing.

Given the pervasive power of Diebold and ES & S over vote counting procedures, Hillary Clinton knew she couldn't win, so she passed on running for president in 2004, perhaps positioning herself for 2008-- if she can do something about the voting counting process in the meantime, that is!

This left the field wide open for everyone else, namely, all the second shelf candidates who were at best long shots. With Dean gone, Kerry emerged as the presumptive candidate, but he knew, given the vote counting situation, there was only one way for him to win the general election: He had to prove to the financial backers of both political parties, as well as the mega-corporations that own the mainstream media, that he would not change the system; he would only fine tune it and do a better job than their boy Bush.

Of course he knew it was a long shot, since Bush was already the consummate stooge for Big Business and the poster boy for the unholy alliance between born-again Christians and conservative Jews. But, if he could show that Bush was just too damn incompetent and dangerous to run the country in an age of terrorism, maybe, just maybe, they would shift their allegiance to him.

But, to quote the right-wing pundits, "Kerry never made his case." In other words, the power brokers decided to stick with Bush, and they tweaked the election in his favor rather than Kerry's.

This explains why the mainstream news media is doing their best to ignore the election fraud story while at the same time underscoring the Republican proposal to get rid of exit polls, traditionally the most accurate polls, and the best deterrent against election fraud caused by easily hacked computerized vote counting machines. It also explains why Kerry accepted his defeat with humility-- the same way Al Gore did-- and didn't bother to put up a fight.

As it turns out, Ralph Nader was right all along: A vote for Kerry was just a vote for the same corrupt corporate system that supports both parties. And listen up, all you Democrats and Progressives who derided Ralph Nader. You owe him a public apology! He stuck to his principles and never caved in to all his friends and admirers who begged him to drop out. He was too wise for that. He had been fighting the system for too long to be suckered by Democratic Party propaganda.

In fact, he tried to tell everyone that the Democrats and Republicans were part of the same hypocrisy; part of the same corrupt system, but no one was listening. "Anyone but Bush!" was the clarion call from Democrats and Progressives alike. "Please, Ralph, don't spoil it for us like you did in the last election! Step aside!"

But Nader knew in his heart that he wasn't the one who caused Al Gore to lose the last election, any more than he would be the one to cause John Kerry to lose this one. Indeed, St. Ralph knew the truth: the fix for the presidential election was in from the very beginning.

The Democratic insiders knew it too; so did the Republicans. The only ones who didn't know it were all the well-intentioned chumps who stood in line on Election Day, idealistically believing their votes really did make a difference.

For their sake, I hope I'm wrong about all this. I hope John Kerry surprises me and comes charging into the news arena on a white horse, kicking up dust, exposing the election as a fraud, and demanding Bush's head on a spear. It would make a great end to a movie or a novel. As Hemingway said in the last line of The Sun Also Rises: "Isn't it pretty to think so?"

References:

The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HTML) (PDF)
Information Technology Association of America
Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act

Michigan Congressman Seeks Exit Poll Data

2004-12-22T01:18:00.000-06:00

By SETH SUTEL, AP Business Writer
NEW YORK - The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee (news - web sites) has asked The Associated Press and five broadcast networks to turn over raw exit poll data collected on Election Day so that any discrepancies between the data and the certified election results can be investigated.

Rep. John Conyers (news, bio, voting record) Jr. of Michigan said in a letter released Tuesday in Washington that the polling firms that conducted the polls on behalf of the news organizations, Mitofsky International and Edison Media Research, had declined to share the information with the committee.

"Without the raw data, the committee will be severely handicapped in its efforts to show the need for serious election reform in the United States," Conyers said in the letter.

The AP and the five television outlets — ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and Fox — formed a consortium called the National Election Pool to conduct exit polls for this year's election after disbanding a previous exit poll group called the Voter News Service, which had problems in both the 2000 and 2002 elections.

Edie Emery, a spokeswoman for the National Election Pool and a CNN employee, said the poll data were still being analyzed and that the group's board would decide how to release a full report on the data early next year. "To release any information now would be incomplete," she said.

Several Web logs carried accounts on the afternoon of Nov. 2 of what they said were leaked information from the exit polls showing that Kerry, a Massachusetts senator, was leading Bush in several battleground states, including Ohio, and poised for victory.

But Bush, a Republican, beat Kerry by about 119,000 votes in Ohio, winning that state's 20 electoral votes and putting him over the top in the race. Bush won re-election with 286 electoral votes to Kerry's 252.

Conyers' letter said the exit poll information could help determine whether there is evidence "of voting irregularities that occurred as a result of poor election practices and intentional voter disenfranchisement."

The exit polling was conducted for the AP and for ABC, a unit of The Walt Disney Co.; CBS, a unit of Viacom Inc.; NBC, a unit of General Electric Co.; CNN, a unit of Time Warner Inc.; and Fox News, owned by News Corp.

"Like Congressman Conyers, we believe the American people deserve answers," said Jack Stokes, a spokesman for the AP. "We want exit polling information to be made public as soon as it is available, as we intended. At this time, the data is still being evaluated for a final report to the National Election Pool."

Officials from ABC and NBC referred calls for comment to the National Election Pool, where CNN's Emery responded for the group. A CBS spokeswoman declined to comment, and officials at Fox could not be reached.

Earlier this month Kerry asked county election officials in Ohio to allow his witnesses to inspect the 92,000 ballots cast in the state in which no vote for president was recorded.

Despite improvements since 2000, when the presidential outcome was delayed for weeks by problems counting ballots in Florida, the nation's voting system remains a locally administered patchwork whose lack of national uniformity distinguishes the United States from many other democracies.

Most complaints have come from Democrats and third-party candidates, but Republicans and bipartisan groups have acknowledged problems. The Government Accountability Office is investigating election problems. Rep. Bob Ney (news, bio, voting record), R-Ohio and chairman of the House Administration Committee, will oversee an inquiry next year.

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission, created in 2002, is also scrutinizing the outcome. It plans to publish in January the government's first report on the voting, which will serve as the basis for congressional recommendations and reforms.

Presidential Election 2004: Interview of Rep. Conyers on Ohio Election

2004-12-21T16:14:00.000-06:00

By Tim Grieve, Salon.com

Rep. John Conyers isn't ready to declare the election stolen, but he'll continue to dig into the droves of complaints - and fight to fix the broken U.S. election system.

For those who believe that the 2004 election was stolen by George W. Bush, Karl Rove and an unholy alliance of party operatives and voting-machine impresarios, a 75-year-old Democratic congressman from Detroit has emerged as the last best hope for American democracy. Almost alone in official Washington, Rep. John Conyers has insisted that the nation understand - and then correct - the problems that plagued the 2004 vote.

With little attention from the media and little support even from members of his own party, Conyers has launched his own probe of the 2004 election. His early conclusion: There may not have been an active conspiracy to suppress the vote and steal the election, but all those problems in Ohio - the long lines in Democratic precincts, the voting machines that may have switched votes, the suspicious actions of a voting-machine company representative, the trumped-up concerns about terrorism in Warren County, the Republican-friendly rulings by the state election official who also happened to chair the Bush-Cheney campaign - well, those things didn't all happen by accident, either.

"You know, orchestrated attempts don't always require a conspiracy," Conyers told Salon on Monday. Conyers said that Bush's supporters in Ohio may have worked to suppress the vote based on cues rather than orders from party officials. "People get the drift from other elections and the way [campaign leaders] talk about how they're going to win the election."

Conyers isn't looking to overturn the election, and he won't say that the Republicans stole it; coming from a member of Congress, such an allegation would be "reckless," he said. But neither is he willing to put the election of 2004 behind him yet. This is the second presidential election in a row in which Republicans have succeeded in suppressing the vote, Conyers said, and he wants to ensure that the system is changed so that it won't happen again. He'll continue his investigation, he'll join the Rev. Jesse Jackson in a protest rally in Ohio on Jan. 3, and when the new Congress meets in January he'll push for further investigation and reform.

Conyers spoke with Salon by phone from Detroit.

Your first public forum on the 2004 election was called "Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio?" Do you know the answer to that question yet?

Well, dozens and dozens of things went wrong. It depends on what part of the state we're going to examine. In Hocking County, a private company accessed an election machine and altered and tampered with it in the absence of election observers. It disturbed a deputy chair of the election in the county so much that she has given a sworn affidavit that has been turned over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and we're in the process of running that down. But what about in Cleveland, Ohio? There, thousands of people claimed that their vote for Kerry was turned into a vote for Bush. Poll workers made mistakes that might have cost thousands of votes in Cleveland. And in Youngstown, machines turned an undetermined number of Kerry votes into Bush votes as well. Provisional ballots were thrown out. There were several conflicting rules. There was mass confusion. In Warren County, they talked about [the possibility that] terrorism might close down the election. I mean, please.

What we're doing, understand, is we're collecting the complaints, the grievances, the outrages, the indignities that people suffered, and then we've got to process them to find out what is valid and what needs to be further examined and what needs to be tossed out. It's not like every complaint is one that has to be counted. What we're trying to do is make the system better.

Do you believe that there was an orchestrated attempt to steal the election?

Well, you know, orchestrated attempts don't always require a conspiracy. People get the drift from other elections and the way [campaign leaders] talk about how they're going to win the election. When you have the exit-polling information discrepancies that occurred in 2004, where the odds of all the swing states coming in so much stronger for Bush than the exit polls indicated - they say that that is, statistically, almost an improbability.

[People] are saying, "No, no, no, that doesn't mean much." But it means a lot. It feeds this growing, [but] not provable feeling among millions of Americans that this was another unfair election.

Do you have that feeling?

Sure, I have a feeling that whenever we can come across ways to make elections fairer or work better or improve the process or simplify the regulations or make voting more available to people who have language problems or disabilities, we have a responsibility to do it. We're trying to improve the system. I'm not trying to attack the outcome. What we need is a system where there are only a few of the kinds of the tens of thousands of complaints that we already have.

Do you believe the outcome of the election would have been different if it had been conducted more fairly?

I have no way of saying that because this gets into conjecture. I make one conjecture and somebody else makes a counter conjecture, and where are we? We're all, "This is what I think." I'm not as concerned about what I think as I am about what people told me went wrong on Election Day that we in Congress, especially the Judiciary Committee, have the responsibility to correct.

But is there any real chance that anything will be corrected? The entire nation was focused on the problems with the electoral system in 2000, yet very little seems to have changed. If meaningful reform didn't come then, how can anyone expect it to come now?

I thought that the Help America Vote Act would improve things dramatically. And although it helped in places, the provisional ballot [process] was misinterpreted. We couldn't get all these private companies to come up with a paper trail on their machines. And with the precinct machines, there was quite a disparity in the conservative counties in Ohio as opposed to the Democratic areas where there were only a few machines.

Republican precincts had plenty of machines, and people could vote quickly.

Instantly, yeah. And we had people waiting for hours only miles away.

So what comes of all of this?

First, we've got to collect the complaints. Second, we've got to investigate them and bring forward the ones we're willing to stand by. And then we have to examine how we correct them. There needs to be, generally stated, more federal regulation over presidential elections. There are just way too many differences, from not only state to state but also county to county.

So far, which complaints are you willing to "stand by"?

It's not a matter of my claiming ownership over the complaints. I'm just doing my job. If all of them are valid, that's what I'm going to present. If half of them are valid, that's what I'm going to present. I'm not going forward with complaints that don't reach the level of believability or credibility.

The complaints you've described in this interview - do they meet that level of believability and credibility?

Oh yes, and plenty more reach that level. So we've got a problem. Many people in the media are saying, "Look, the election's over, and yes, we had problems." It's like many people are just taking this. Then we have the hundreds of thousands of people who are outraged and supportive of me for carrying on and trying to make sure we get to the bottom of all these grievances that have been brought forward.

We've received e-mails from hundreds of those people, and many of them seem certain that the election was stolen, or at least that the outcome would have been different if the election had been more fair.

Sure.

But you're not there yet.

Well, no, that's not why I'm doing this. I'm not trying to get there. I'm trying to do the kind of job that people will say, "I think the congressman and those working with him are going about this in a fairly impartial, effective manner" - and not that they're coming in as thieves trying to upset the election result. To me, that would not be what I'm in Congress to do. I mean, I would be doing this if it were just the reverse. A fair election process applies to everybody - Democrats and Republicans, conservatives and liberals alike.

Four years ago, when it came time for Congress to certify the election results, a number of House members rose to protest the certification of the Bush electors from Florida. Not a single member of the Senate joined them. Do you expect the same thing to happen this time around?

No, I think the Senate is going to go along with an inquiry this time. I don't think they would embarrass themselves to let this happen two times in a row.

Has any senator said to you that he or she will call for an inquiry?

No, I haven't talked with a single one. I'm not citing somebody who I know is going to do it. I'm not aware of anyone. I just don't think the Senate would get caught in that position.

You haven't exactly enjoyed a groundswell of support from other members of Congress. Are there Democrats in Congress who support what you're doing but won't come forward and say so publicly?

Well, there are Republicans who support what I'm doing who haven't been willing to come forward. Look, calling for fair elections is not the most radical thing in the world. We're not positing some revolutionary theory here. We're asking that the people who complained be given a fair hearing.

Have any Republicans actually told you that they support your efforts?

I'd rather not comment on that.

Are you surprised that none of them have said so publicly?

No, not really. If you had a majority leader like theirs, you'd probably think twice about it yourself.

What about the Democratic leadership? Harry Reid, the new Senate minority leader, says he'd rather dance with Bush than fight him. Should the problems in Ohio change the way Democrats in Congress think about accommodating Bush in his second term?

Well, I'm not sure how much accommodation is going to happen. I listen to Bush talking about "reaching out," which he talked about the first time, and we had the most divided federal system in memory. And now those kinds of phrases are being tossed about during the Christmas holiday again. Please. I don't put much stock in it.

Bush billed himself as a "uniter, not a divider."

I keep reminding myself of what he said. He sure didn't unite anybody I knew of.

And what about John Kerry? Have you spoken with him about your investigation?

His lawyer was in Columbus for our hearing there last week. And he has also, at the same time, asked for a full recount in Delaware County [Ohio].

Has the Kerry campaign done enough? A lot of Democrats think Kerry conceded too soon.

It's easy to be in an armchair somewhere saying, "You've got to do this; you've got to do that." He had more in his control. And besides, he's the candidate. I wish he'd listened to me more, and everybody wishes that the guy they voted for would listen to them more. But he's the master of his ship.

When you say that you wish Kerry had listened to you more, do you mean during the campaign or in the days after the election?

During the campaign and after.

What do you wish he were doing now?

I don't want to go into all of this "shoulda, coulda, woulda." I think it takes our focus off the fact that we had far too many grievances and misfires in this election that have to be corrected.

But you don't believe that those problems were the result of a concerted effort by the Republican Party or the Bush-Cheney campaign? You think people who wanted to see the president reelected just got the message somehow that they were supposed to do the things they did?

People didn't have to get a message. If you use questionable tactics and generally attempt to suppress the vote - that's what the Republicans' strategies were all about: "How do we limit the vote?" Because the more people who voted, the more imperiled they felt they would be. And from that kind of an assumption, you can get a whole lot of activities that might not meet the smell test.

Because people on the ground understand the overall strategy and then take it upon themselves to engage in whatever conduct they think will help?

That's what frequently happens, and usually does.

Do you believe that Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell did that? Do you think he acted with the intent to suppress the vote?

I know that Kenneth Blackwell made some decisions that were blatant and outrageous for a secretary of state. How he felt that his head was big enough to be chairman of the "Re-elect Bush" committee and also head of the administration of the electoral vote for the president in that same state was beyond me.

Is that the sort of issue that you hope to address through legislative reform?

Oh, good night, yeah. There are very few people who did what he did.

Do you think you'll ever be able to prove that there was a coordinated effort to steal the election?

We're not trying to prove that. This is what we're discussing: We're trying to improve the situation wherever we can to make a better voting system in the states.

But a lot of the people who support your efforts desperately want you to prove that there was a conspiracy. If the e-mails we get are any indication, a lot of them believe that the existence of a conspiracy has already been proven.

Well, you know, a citizen's point of view may be different from a federal lawmaker's point of view. The citizens are entitled to form their own opinions. They can assert that easily. A member of Congress, the ranking member of Judiciary ... I can't make those assertions without proof. That would be reckless.

So you don't make them.

No, I don't.

What do you do?

We pass laws. We make laws and we try to correct the system through the legislative process.

And what conclusions have you reached about how the system can be fixed?

Everyone is beginning to reexamine the appropriateness of the Electoral College. We realize that provisional balloting needs to be streamlined and simplified. We know that there should be paper trails in computers. We're beginning to wonder if we haven't privatized the electoral system so that the computer tabulators can do more and know more than the electoral commissions of the counties themselves.

In the meantime, what do you say to all of the people who believe in their hearts that our democracy is broken and that the election was stolen?

I ask and invite everybody to turn in any evidence that they want that helps proves whatever position they believe, or even a position they don't believe. But this isn't a hunch and suspicion game. This is very serious business. Either there were defects so numerous and so plentiful that we had a faulty election, or we had an election that had these defects [but they didn't alter the outcome of the election]. And as we go forward with trying to improve the process, my whole objective is not to change the election result but to try to improve the process itself.

Tim Grieve is a senior writer for Salon based in San Francisco.

Ohio Election Agents View Computer Repair

2004-12-21T16:11:00.000-06:00

Associated Press

LOGAN, Ohio - Election officials watched Monday as a technician repeated a repair he had made to a vote tallying computer, then announced they had found no evidence of any sort of tampering, despite a congressman's request for an FBI probe.

Observers, including a Green Party representative who had sought a presidential recount, agreed the procedure did not alter the Election Day vote total in the county, Hocking County Prosecutor Larry Beal said.

(Continued)

MSNBC responds to Curtis affidavit

2004-12-21T13:27:00.000-06:00

Olbermann response to programmer’s affidavit fails to ask tough questions, note Feeney ties

This from Keith Olbermann, the lone ‘reporter’ on the voting irregularity beat. Olbermann gets responses from Feeney, who seems to laugh at Curtis’ claims and gently threaten NBC with legal action.

Olbermann, however, gets some facts wrong – that Curtis was a ‘disgruntled’ employee is certainly in the eye of the beholder; on his departure, he was thrown a party and the company, Yang Enterprises, is said to have asked him to stay on. It’s certainly possible, however, that Curtis became a disgruntled employee long after he left.

Olbermann fails to note that Yang Enterprises has already lied about employing an illegal alien who later tried to export sensitive missile technology to China. He’s also failed to ask the FBI about an alleged investigation into Yang’s dealings about knowingly employing an illegal alien and falsifying his employment status to get him security clearances at NASA.

Also curious is that Olbermann takes Yang’s lawyer at his word – who was previously Rep. Feeney’s law partner and gave $1,500 to Feeney’s 2002 congressional campaign. Additionally, Olbermann does not actually confirm a police report exists on Curtis.

Meanwhile, he failed to interview Curtis entirely.

(Continued)

Election 2004: "Rise of the Machines" Map

2004-12-21T03:59:00.000-06:00

There is a very interesting and intuitive map of the country and what types of voting they conducted. As well as the means the votng was counted.
View the Map HERE!

Florida County by County Voting Machine Information

2004-12-21T03:51:00.000-06:00

(Source:sptimes.com)

Green Party official pleased with local recount of presidential vote

2004-12-21T03:42:00.000-06:00

The statewide presidential recount is not over yet, but in most of southeastern Ohio, county boards of elections have complied with requests and the voting counts are accurate, a regional coordinator said.

The recount variations are "within the noise spectrum for an analogue signal," according to Orren Whiddon, a retired mechanical engineer. "An analogue signal is always going to have noise. In fact the presence of noise is one of the things that tells you it's a genuine system."

Employer of programmer who alleged vote-rigging prototype caught in apparent lie

2004-12-20T16:24:00.000-06:00

NASA contractor Yang caught in apparent lie over illegal alien; Questions raised about Chinese spying

To see the time cards, click here

By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor

In an effort to refute charges made by a former employee that the company aided in the development of a vote-rigging prototype, a NASA contractor has ensnared itself in an apparent lie.

The company, Yang Enterprises, asserts that a Chinese national who pled guilty to sending sensitive U.S. missile detection technology to China had never been an employee of the firm.

The records, however, show otherwise.

A copy of timecards provided to RAW STORY by Brad Blog acquired through a Freedom of Information Act request show that the employee, Henry Nee, was indeed employed as a Yang consultant.

Melanie Sloan, the Executive Director of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, the D.C. watchdog which is investigating the charges, confirmed that she had seen the timecards but could not independently verify their authenticity.

Yang, when told of the timecards, denied that Nee was ever employed there.

(Continued)

Ohio Recount Stirs Troubled

2004-12-20T15:21:00.000-06:00

As a statewide election recount got underway in Ohio last week, a Democratic congressman called on the FBI to impound vote-tabulating computers in at least one county and investigate suspicions of election tampering in the state.

Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan), ranking Democrat of the House Judiciary Committee, sought the investigation after an Ohio election official disclosed in an affidavit (.pdf) that an employee of Triad Governmental Systems, the company that wrote voting software used with punch-card machines in 41 of Ohio's 88 counties, dismantled Hocking County's tabulation computer days before the recount and "put a patch on it."

(Continued)

Theft of the Election, Redux.

2004-12-19T20:28:00.000-06:00

Why 2000 was Prelude to 2004 -- and the Democratic Party Got Mugged a Second Time.

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

In case you missed it, an exhaustive 23,422-word Vanity Fair article, published just prior to the election (October), spilled the beans that at least four of the five Supreme Court justices who stole the election from Al Gore did it with willing forethought. And the fifth, Justice Kennedy, who came up with the hypocritical, convoluted reason for awarding the election to Bush, was probably just pretending to be "open-minded."

In short, the story, the first one to reveal the inside machinations of the infamous decision of 2000, confirmed that this wasn't a judicial decision that decided the election 4 years ago; it was a premeditated theft of democracy from the American voters.

The partisan choice of five justices -- led by the judicial right-wing molotov-cocktail throwing Nino Scalia -- outweighed the selection of the American people.

Why is this important now? Because it confirms that the Bush Cartel will do and did everything to win -- and it doesn't take a leap of imagination or common sense to speculate that with four years in office, they were able to heist the election this time without a nod and a wink to Nino and his right wing ship of judicially radical pirates.

What we forget in our focus on Ohio is that the Republicans, through dirty tricks, voter suppression and intimidation, faulty felons' lists, and the deep-sixing of tens of thousands of Kerry votes -- among other anti-democracy tactics -- probably had the election heisted before the polls even opened. They privatized the counting of votes of Americans and turned it over to companies deeply ensconced in the Republican camp and Republican politics, with checkered histories and Republican ownership. They intentionally mis-registered college students, threw away the registration forms of perhaps tens of thousands of Democrats, and lost more than 55,000 absentee ballots in Jewish/Democratic leaning Broward County, FL, alone. And this list is just for starters.

The Bush rogue regime was born a bastard child by a fixed Supreme Court vote and now controls the process by which any investigation of voting irregularities would be pursued. Indeed, Ken Blackwell, one of the two key Rove 2004 Katherine Harrises (along with Florida Secretary of State Hood), wrote Congressman John Conyers just this week that only the Department of Justice or the GAO had the authority to investigate voting in Ohio. So, two agencies under the Republicans, who Blackwell has just declared the winner of the Presidency, are the only ones Blackwell would allow to investigate their victory. It's a tactic worthy of Stalin -- and the Bush Cartel is one terrorist attack short of achieving full dictatorship powers, while the nation sleeps.

So what happened in the Supreme Court in the fateful days following the election of 2000? You should find someplace to read or still buy a back edition of the October, 2004, Vanity Fair, because they don't have the article we are about to discuss on their website (http://www.vanityfair.com/).

Be patient, as we walk you through a few select, edited, passages from this pivotal journalistic article in the publication edited by Graydon Carter, author of "What We've Lost," a courageous man who continually exposes the Bush crimes against America and the world.

MoveOn.org: "Investigate the Vote!"

2004-12-19T19:12:00.000-06:00

MoveOn.org has initiated a movement to have visitors send messages to congress in their name to investigate the irregularities of the 2004 election.

From the MoveOn.org website:

Questions are swirling around whether the election was conducted honestly or not. We need to know -- was it or wasn't it?
If people were wrongly prevented from voting, or if legitimate votes were mis-counted or not counted at all, we need to know so the wrongdoers can be held accountable, and to help prevent this from happening again.

Director of firm that was paid to repair Florida’s voting list which disenfranchised African Americans has apartheid ties

2004-12-19T19:01:00.000-06:00

Director of Florida voting contractor chaired companies linked to apartheid

By Larisa Alexandrovna and John Byrne | RAW STORY Staff

A lead director of the company hired by Florida to fix the state’s controversial felon voting rolls is also chairman of a company many regard as a former pillar of South African apartheid, RAW STORY has discovered.

Since joining the board of African mining conglomerate Anglo American plc a year ago, Sir Mark Moody-Stuart has sought to fend off class-action lawsuits from laborers and Africans who allege the company played a major role in propping up South Africa’s former apartheid government.

Moody-Stuart is lead external director of Accenture, the Arthur Anderson spinoff, which Florida hired to repair issues of eligibility the state’s central voting list. The list disenfranchised thousands of voters—many of them African American—in the 2000 presidential election cycle.

Contracted in 2001 for roughly $2.2 million, Accenture was hired to address voting eligibility issues which wrongly listed African-Americans as felons and thereby rendered them ineligible to vote under Florida law.

After three years on the project, the new list was scrapped July 10 of this year when the media and other watch groups discovered the list enfranchised Hispanic felons, without fully resolving eligibility issues of African Americans.

Miami-Dade, for example, received a filtered list from the state of more than 17,000 names, with only 14 of those wrongly identified as felons restored to the voting rolls. Some noted that Florida’s African Americans tend to vote Democratic, while Hispanics—in part due to the state’s Cuban-American population—tend to vote Republican.

Accenture also failed to comply with a 2000 NAACP settlement which required the firm to notify them and the U.S. Justice Department of project changes.

Clint Curtis Full Sworn Video Taped Testimony

2004-12-18T17:06:00.000-06:00

The full Clint Curtis sworn testimony before members of House Judiciary Committee is now available here. (Previously, we only had links to a portion of his testimony, which did not include his naming of Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) as having asked him to write the "vote-rigging software prototype! This clip now includes all of Curtis' testimony! A streaming RealPlayer version is now available here.)

(As reported on BradBlog.com)

Firm accused of tampering with data left some unofficial results on public webserver

2004-12-18T16:28:00.000-06:00

Triad left unofficial Ohio results on website

By John Byrne | RAW STORY Editor

Triad Governmental Systems, the firm accused by a county employee of tampering with tabulating machines and attempting to plant false information into the Ohio recount, left some unofficial results publicly available on their website, RAW STORY has learned.

The firm left the unofficial results of at least two counties – Lorain and Madison – available as text files on their corporate website. Both counties show “unofficial cumulative results” from the eleven p.m. to one a.m. hour on Election Day and Nov. 3.

The votes at those times closely correlate with the final reported results.

When told of the results, a Triad spokesman paused for several seconds before responding. The spokesman declined to give his name.

“Generally the only purpose of that on election night is that counties used to get inundated with calls,” he said. If someone calls, he said, “they say just look at the website and you’ll see what the unofficial count is.”

But the spokesman declined to answer why the unofficial results was posted on the firm’s website. When pressed, he hung up, saying, “have a nice day.”

Ohio’s Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell also posted unofficial results on Election Day and the days following the election on the state’s website. This is the only known incident of a private firm publishing unofficial Ohio results on their own site.

Triad also posted official election results in their root IP domain 66.241.236.181 dated in various days in November and December for the Ohio counties of Ashtabula, Brown, Clinton, Darke, Greene, Preble and Union.

A Triad employee was accused Tuesday of “inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering” by Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich) in the New York Times. After the alleged tampering took place, the state decided to recount another county for the
Ohio recount, the Times reported.

The employee asserts that the Triad representative showed up announced, saying he hoped to answer questions, and proceeded to dismantle a computer used for tabulating. She also said that the technician made additional changes after she informed him that her county was being used as a test county in the Ohio state recount, which is currently underway.

Triad provides voting systems to nearly half of the state, including systems that count paper ballots. Together with another company, ES&S, the two firms make up for 80 percent voting tabulation systems of Ohio’s counties.

Larisa Alexandrovna contributed reporting for this article.

GRIM FLASHBACK: "E-voting: Yes or no?"

2004-12-18T13:30:00.000-06:00

High-tech methods examined at national conference

By Daniel Sieberg
CNN Headline News
Wednesday, December 10, 2003 Posted: 10:19 AM EST (1519 GMT)

(CNN) --The U.S. presidential election is less than a year away, but some tech experts have lingering and deep-rooted concerns about the way electronic voting is being handled.

In 2000, several counties used high-tech machines for the first time, such as touch screens, though most places still relied on punch card or paper ballots. During the 2002 election, an increasing number of counties deployed the automated machines, partly in response to the hanging chad debacle in Florida. For example, the entire state of Georgia used machines from a company called Diebold.

Politicians hoped the new devices would save money, make the process more efficient and accurate, and alleviate any discrepancies.

To a certain degree, that happened. But other problems have arisen and the controversy has been re-ignited in the past few months.

Certain voting machine firms have come under fire for alleged flaws in their software, and many tech observers would like to see more rigid standards in place. Others would like a more substantive paper trail of the voting history with each machine. At the center of the debate is the fact that voting companies do not need to reveal their code to outside, independent reviewers because of proprietary protection.

To help bridge the gap, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) will be holding a two-day symposium this week in Gaithersburg, Maryland. NIST falls under the Commerce Department, and this gathering is part of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA).

Prominent voting and tech experts in attendance include Jim Adler, president and CEO of VoteHere, which makes voting systems; David Dill, computer science professor at Stanford University; and Avi Rubin from Johns Hopkins University, who has highlighted e-voting pitfalls in the past.

Although there is some agreement over the benefits of high-tech voting -- easier for people with disabilities, potentially more cost-effective, minimization of errors, etc. -- there are plenty of issues that need to be addressed.

"There's utter chaos and confusion out there," says Harvard University's Rebecca Mercuri, who will present her concerns on standards during a session Thursday. Mercuri believes the sooner these hurdles are overcome the better.

I'll be there during the conference, and will report on what comes of it. The hope is clearly that all levels of government can better share information and learn about the most effective means for high-tech voting. Will there be a sweeping overhaul of voting technology by November 2004? Maybe not. But this conference is intended as a major step toward responsible and effective voting technology.

Election lawsuit gathering steam in mainstream media

2004-12-18T13:27:00.000-06:00

While the outcome of the 2004 presidential election is all but in the history books, an interesting new chapter is being written right now in Ohio, the state that cemented George W. Bush’s electoral college victory.
A lawsuit filed there Monday challenges Bush’s victory in the state, alleging that a long list of irregularities, including intentional vote suppression in Democratic precincts and outright manipulation of vote totals in some locations, combined to steal the Ohio election and the presidency from Democratic candidate John Kerry. While Kerry isn’t behind the lawsuit, his campaign has become more vocal in recent weeks in pushing for answers about what actually happened in Ohio on Nov. 2. and is now funding some legal work there.
Questions about the vote in Ohio and elsewhere have been rampant on the Internet ever since Nov. 2, but the mainstream media has been slow to pick up on this developing story— until this week.
The lawsuit certainly has attracted media interest, as has an ongoing investigation into the situation, led by Democratic congressman John Conyers. Conyers began hearings this week in Ohio and already those hearings have produced very disturbing revelations about potential vote fraud. One of the most electrifying comes from an affidavit filed Dec. 13 by the deputy director of elections in Hocking County, Ohio. The official, Sherole Eaton, claims that a technician from the company that was hired to help tabulate returns from electronic voting machines, entered county offices on Dec. 10 under the guise of answering legal questions in advance of a partial hand recount of certain precincts, as requested by the Libertarian and Green Party presidential candidates in Ohio.
Instead, the individual told election staff that there was a problem with their main tabulation computer and he began dismantling the machine, while making several calls to his head office for programming instructions. He also asked local election officials which precincts would be recounted and appeared to make programming changes based on that information. The technician later provided election officials with what he called “a cheat sheet” that they could use to make sure their numbers matched during the recount.
The company, Triad Systems, involved in the alleged incident has sought to provide similar “assistance” in more than a dozen Ohio counties where it contracts for services. The head officials with the company, incidentally, are major Republican donors, although they’ve denied wrongdoing.
Conyers is seeking an FBI investigation into the incident, which for the first time suggests that private firms involved in vote counting in Ohio and elsewhere may have actually rigged machines.
Questions about that possibility have lingered for weeks, especially since the vote totals reported in Ohio and other states never matched up with exit poll results. Differences between exit polls and reported vote totals were the main justification for apparently valid charges that the recent election in Ukraine was rigged by the party in power there.
But in this country, similar discrepancies have been largely waved off as irrelevant by most major media. Conyers, as part of his investigation, has asked the firm that oversees the exit poll data for the major networks to release all of their raw data for independent analysis.
The questions about Ohio have only been exacerbated by the reaction of that state’s Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, who, like Katherine Harris in Florida four years ago, headed Bush’s re-election effort in Ohio. Blackwell has stonewalled Conyers’ investigation and has failed to respond to inquiries from Kerry campaign lawyers. Blackwell may have also violated Ohio law last week when he ordered that voting records in one Ohio county be locked down, preventing citizen investigators from examining them. Ohio law is explicit that such records are open to public inspection.
Another Ohio County, Warren County, near Cinncinnati, locked down all of its information starting election night. Unlike other election counts, which take place in the open, Warren County officials banned all members of the public and media from witnessing their vote-counting, purportedly under order from the Dept. of Homeland Security. Warren County provided Bush with a huge margin of victory, contributing about a third of Bush’s total margin in the state. The fact that those results have yet to be accounted for publicly has left plenty of legitimate questions out there.
One other major issue is the well-documented discrepancy between the number of voting machines available in Democratic precincts in Ohio versus the number in Republican areas. Voters in many Democratic strongholds were forced to wait in line for many hours to vote, while most Republican precincts had an abundance of voting machines and little waiting. Whether the discrepancy was intentional or not, the effect is almost undeniable— lost votes for Kerry. And on that score, Democrats must share some of the blame. The party poured millions into Ohio in efforts to prevent voter disenfranchisement and yet they apparently paid little attention to the distribution of voting machines. Democrats, it seems, continue to overlook the fundamentals of the voting process. The Republicans don’t make that mistake— which is one reason they keep leaving the Democrats in the electoral dust.

Hanging Chads Make Reappearance in Ohio

2004-12-18T13:16:00.000-06:00

(Excerpt)

According to a sworn statement from Sherole Eaton, the county's deputy director of elections, a TRIAD representative told her on Friday he wanted to inspect the county's tabulating machine. She said the employee then told her that "the battery in the computer was dead and that the stored information was gone."

"He proceeded to take the computer apart and call his office to get information to input into our computer," Eaton said.

Conyers said similar TRIAD visits have been reported in other Ohio counties.

Brett Rapp, president of Xenia, Ohio-based TRIAD, said it's standard procedure to prepare the machines for a recount so they only tally the presidential race. He said company representatives have worked on computers in every county that uses TRIAD software.

The only difference in Hocking was that when the TRIAD employee arrived, the computer's hard drive had to be repaired, he said. No vote tabulations were lost, he said.

"He had to fix the computer in order to continue the recount process," Rapp said, adding that he welcomes an investigation because his employees did nothing wrong.

Council Calls for Presidential Vote Investigation

2004-12-18T13:11:00.000-06:00

by Matthew Artz

As a recount proceeds in Ohio, Berkeley has become the first city to add its voice to the chorus of skeptics demanding an investigation into alleged voting irregularities in last month’s presidential elections.
On Tuesday, the City Council unanimously passed a resolution requesting the Government Accountability Office undertake an investigation and calling for national election reforms.

“Democracy is on the line,” said Phoebe Anne Sorgen of the city’s Peace and Justice Commission, which recommended the resolution to the council.

Although she doesn’t expect the Bush administration or the Republican-controlled Congress to heed the city’s call, Sorgen hopes other municipalities and organizations call for investigations.

Already Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan), the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, has held informal hearings into irregularities reported in Ohio. Along with Democratic colleagues, Conyers has demanded that Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell respond to 12 irregularities in vote counting and election procedures disclosed during the sessions.

On Wednesday, Conyers upped the ante, requesting that the FBI and an Ohio county prosecutor investigate possible election tampering in Hocking County, Ohio. The charges are based on a sworn affidavit by the county deputy director of elections, Sherole Eaton. According to the affidavit posted on Conyer’s website, Eaton said that a representative of Triad Governmental Systems, the firm which designed and manages vote counting software in Ohio counties, adjusted the tabulator in Hocking County last Friday in advance of this week’s scheduled recount.

The recount, which under Ohio rules requires that 3 percent of the vote in each county be tallied by hand, is being funded jointly by the Green Party and the Libertarian Party.

Closer to home, UC Berkeley Professor Michael Hout and a team of graduate students found that irregularities in Florida electronic voting machines may have awarded up to 260,000 votes to President Bush, who won the state by a margin of over 380,000.

Berkeley’s resolution calls for, among other things, requiring that election day become a mandatory holiday or moved to the weekend, early voting throughout the county, a voter-verifiable paper trail of every vote cast, public access to election machine computer codes, consistent national standards for security and access, and that states appoint non-partisan officials to run elections.

Councilmember Dona Spring pushed for the council to pass the resolution before its Christmas recess to show support for Conyers and others in Congress who are challenging the election results.

“As time passes, the Congress will feel less pressure to deal with voting irregularities,” she said.

At the request of Councilmember Gordon Wozniak, the council stripped the resolution of one section that noted that up to one-third of Berkeley ballots weren’t counted until three weeks after the election. The delay was due to a county policy that all write-in ballots submitted on election day be classified as provisional ballots, which require county officials to confirm that the voter is properly registered. Wozniak said he thought the matter was trivial compared to the other allegations in the resolution.

New Riyad Bank, Alhamrani agreements underline Diebold's growth in Middle East

2004-12-18T13:06:00.000-06:00

Diebold, Incorporated (NYSE: 'DBD') has signed a deal with the Riyad Bank of Saudi Arabia to deploy 100 Diebold Opteva automated teller machines (ATMs) across the bank's network in a move that underlines the company's continued growth in the Middle East.

Saudi Arabia: Saturday, December 18 - 2004

The installations will be maintained and serviced by the Alhamrani Universal Company (Universal/AU) that has also just reinforced its exclusive distribution agreement with Diebold to extend its commercial reach in Saudi Arabia to other markets in the Gulf, including Dubai, Bahrain, Oman and Qatar.

One of the largest financial institutions in the Middle East, the Riyad Bank is a modern, financial-services company with a strong and growing retail and corporate banking franchise in Saudi Arabia and has a full-service approach, delivered through an accessible network of 200 branches, now including more than 650 ATMs.

About 30 ATMs will be installed this month (December 2004) and the remainder during 2005. This will expand the bank's automated branch network, providing added convenience to its recently enhanced telephone, Internet and mobile banking services.

Innovation, accessibility and convenience are all part of the Diebold Opteva family. Riyad Bank has purchased a mix of Diebold Opteva 720 advanced-function lobby ATMs and Opteva 740 advanced-function, through-the-wall, drive-up ATMs. Both run on Agilis™, Diebold's multi-vendor software platform.

With the expansion of its ATM network, Riyad Bank will now provide its customers with a variety of options for electronic financial transactions (EFTs). When the bank implements Diebold's Deposit Automation solutions, its customers will also have the ability to deposit cash directly into their personal accounts without the need to wait for access to a bank teller.

Diebold's Deposit Automation solution enables Opteva to count notes in bulk and read checks, processing both as a single-deposit transaction displayed on the screen and verified with a receipt.

'Our retail customers are attracted to the bank's innovative approach to consumer finance products and investment products alike,' said Riyadh Al-Zahrani, vice president and remote banking manager for Riyad Bank.

'For example, we offer the best deal on credit cards in the Kingdom as a result of an industry-leading initiative. Accessibility and convenience are also key benefits of being a Riyad Bank customer, and this was the reason for choosing Diebold Opteva ATMs. After a full evaluation of both our customers' needs and those of the bank, we picked Diebold's Opteva ATMs because of their unique functionality and potential for expansion.'

Since the 1980s, Alhamrani has been Diebold's exclusive distributor of ATMs and physical and electronic security products in Saudi Arabia. Diebold ATMs are supported and maintained by Alhamrani's network of 20 service-support centres. More than 120 qualified technical and engineering staff members are deployed to service ATMs through the company's centralised ATM help desk in Jeddah.

Diebold and Alhamrani are also both poised to further develop a more competitive and professional customer-service oriented business.

They will expand their partnership by leveraging Alhamrani's expertise in the service area, strengthening Diebold support in the Gulf and Middle East region, when and where required. Diebold customers within the region can expect higher-quality maintenance and support for terminals and software in their ATM networks.

The geographic proximity of Alhamrani's support centres will enable the company to provide faster response to requests for service. Response time will be optimized due to better availability of spares stock, shorter shipment distances for parts, access to a more sophisticated repair center and more qualified technical staff that are already familiar with and experienced in specific ATM configurations in the region.

The expanded partnership, which comes as the result of years of collaboration between the companies, is intended to increase Diebold's business and consolidate sales operations in the region. The growing collaboration will provide considerable improvements in the support services available to customers in the Gulf and Middle East region, leveraging the infrastructures of Alhamrani and Diebold as reputable and well-positioned companies.

Proof of Ohio Election Fraud Exposed

2004-12-18T03:26:00.000-06:00

By William Rivers Pitt, t r u t h o u t | Report

Among activists and investigators looking into allegations of vote fraud in the 2004 Presidential election, the company always mentioned was Diebold and its suspicious electronic touch-screen voting machines.

It is Diebold that has multiple avowed Republicans on its Board of Directors. It was Diebold that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bush’s election campaign. It was Diebold CEO Walden O’Dell who vowed to deliver Ohio’s electoral votes to Bush.

As it turns out, everyone was looking the wrong way. The company that requires immediate and penetrating scrutiny is Triad Systems.

Triad is owned by a man named Tod Rapp, who has also donated money to both the Republican Party and the election campaign of George W. Bush. Triad manufactures punch-card voting systems, and also wrote the computer program that tallied the punch-card votes cast in 41 Ohio counties last November. This Triad company graphic displays the counties where their machines are used:

Given the ubiquity of the Triad voting systems in Ohio, the allegations that have been leveled against this company strike to the heart of the assumed result of the 2004 election.

Earlier this week, the allegations against triad were first raised by Green Party candidate David Cobb, who testified at a hearing held in Columbus, Ohio by Rep. John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee. In his testimony, Cobb stated:

Mr. Chairman, though our time is limited, I must bring to the committee's attention the most recent and perhaps most troubling incident that was related to my campaign on Sunday, December 12, about a shocking event that occurred last Friday, December 10.

A representative from Triad Systems came into a county board of elections office un-announced. He said he was just stopping by to see if they had any questions about the up-coming recount. He then headed into the back room where the Triad supplied Tabulator (a card reader and older PC with custom software) is kept. He told them there was a problem and the system had a bad battery and had "lost all of its data". He then took the computer apart and started swapping parts in and out of it and another "spare" tower type PC also in the room. He may have had spare parts in his coat as one of the BOE people moved it and remarked as to how very heavy it was. He finally re-assembled everything and said it was working but to not turn it off.

He then asked which precinct would be counted for the 3% recount test, and the one which had been selected as it had the right number of votes, was relayed to him. He then went back and did something else to the tabulator computer.

The Triad Systems representative suggested that since the hand count had to match the machine count exactly, and since it would be hard to memorize the several numbers which would be needed to get the count to come out exactly right, that they should post this series of numbers on the wall where they would not be noticed by observers. He suggested making them look like employee information or something similar. The people doing the hand count could then just report these numbers no matter what the actual count of the ballots revealed. This would then "match" the tabulator report for this precinct exactly. The numbers were apparently the final certified counts for the selected precinct.

Triad is contracted to do much of the elections work in this county and elsewhere in Ohio. This included programming the candidates into the tabulator, and coming up with the rotation of candidates in the various precincts (that is, the order of which candidate is first changes between precincts). They also have a technician in the office on election night to actually run the tabulator itself.

Triad also supplies the network computers on which all of the voter registration information and processing is kept for the county.

It was unusual for the computers to be taken apart. At least one member of the Board of Elections was told the tabulator was in pieces when he called to check on the office.

The source of this report believes that the Triad representative was "making the rounds" of visiting other counties also before the recount. This person also stated they would not pass on the suggestion of the "posted" hidden totals, and would refuse to go along with it if it were suggested by the others in the office at the time.

The source of this information believes they could lose their job if they come forward.

The source of this information is named Sherole Eaton, Hocking County deputy director of elections. She has since written and signed an affidavit describing her experience with the Triad representative, the text of which is here:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AFFIDAVIT
December 13, 2004
Sherole Eaton
Re: General Election 2004 - Hocking County, TriAd
Dell Computer about 14 years old - No tower

On Friday, December 10 2004, Michael from TriAd called in the AM to inform us that he would be in our office in the PM on the same day. I asked him why he was visiting us. He said, "to check out your tabulator, computer, and that the attorneys will be asking some tricky questions and he wanted to go over some of the questions they maybe ask." He also added that there would be no charge for this service.

He arrived at about 12:30PM. I hung his coat up and it was very heavy. I made a comment about it being so heavy. He, Lisa Schwartze and I chatted for a few minutes. He proceeded to go to the room where our computer and tabulation machine is kept. I followed him into the room. I had my back to him when he turned the computer on. He stated that the computer was not coming up. I did see some commands at the lower left hand of the screen but no menu. He said that the battery in the computer was dead and that the stored information was gone. He said that he could put a patch on it and fix it. My main concern was - what if this happened when we were ready to do the recount. He proceeded to take the computer apart and call his offices to get information to input into our computer. Our computer is fourteen years old and as far as I know had always worked in the past. I asked him if the older computer, that is in the same room. could be used for the recount. I don't remember exactly what he said but I did relay to him that the computer was old and a spare. At some point he asked if he could take the spare computer apart and I said "yes". He took both computers apart. I don't remember seeing any tools and he asked Sue Wallace, Clerk, for a screwdriver. She got it for him. At this point I was frustrated about the computer not performing and feared that it wouldn't work for the recount. I called Gerald Robinette, board chairman, to inform him regarding the computer problem and asked him if we could have Tri Ad come to our offices to run the program and tabulator for the recount. Gerald talked on the phone with Michael and Michael assured Gerald that he could fix our computer. He worked on the computer until about 3:00 PM and then asked me which precinct and the number of the precinct we were going to count. I told him, Good Hope 1 # 17. He went back into the tabulation room. Shortly after that he (illegible) stated that the computer was ready for the recount and told us not to turn the computer off so it would charge up.

Before Lisa ran the tests, Michael said to turn the computer off. Lisa said, " I thought you said we weren't supposed to turn it off." He said turn it off and right back on and it should come up. It did come up and Lisa ran the tests. Michael gave us instructions on how to explain the rotarien, what the tests mean, etc. No advice on how to handle the attorneys but to have our Prosecuting Attorney at the recount to answer any of their legal questions. He said not to turn the computer off until after the recount.

He advised Lisa and I on how to post a "cheat sheet" on the wall so that only the board members and staff would know about it and and what the codes meant so the count would come out perfect and we wouldn't have to do a full hand recount of the county. He left about 5:00 PM.

My faith in Tri Ad and the Xenia staff has been nothing but good. The realization that this company and staff would do anything to dishonor or disrupt the voting process is distressing to me and hard to believe. I'm being completely objective about the above statements and the reason I'm bringing this forward is to, hopefully, rule out any wrongdoing.

Further buttressing Eaton’s claim is an addendum to a previous affidavit filed by Evelyn Roberson who, you may recall, was involved in the Greene County recount action that was summarily shut down by Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell. Her addendum reads as follows:

Addendum to Declaration of Evelyn Roberson dated December 12, 2004
Re: Incidents of December 10, 2004

This is to add to the approximately 1 :15 p.m. portion of the visit with the Deputy Director of Elections Lyn McCoy with respect to the following comment:

"She said they would have their computer technician check over their computers on Monday in case they has been tampered with."
the addition is that Lyn McCoy also mentioned to me at the same time that her computer technician was with Triad.

I declare under penalty of perjury the forgoing is true and correct.

Dated: December 14, 2004

Evelyn Roberson

Original versions of these documents should be available later on Wednesday on the website of Rep. Conyers.

Conyers, upon hearing these allegations, sent a letter to both the FBI Special Agent in Charge in Ohio and the Hocking County Prosecutor. The text of that letter is as follows:

December 15, 2004

As part of the Democratic staff's investigation into irregularities in the 2004 election and following up on a lead provided to me by Green Party Presidential Candidate, David Cobb, I have learned that Sherole Eaton, a Deputy Director of Board of Elections in Hocking County, Ohio, has first hand knowledge of inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering in the Ohio presidential election in violation of federal and state law.

I have information that similar actions of this nature may be occurring in other counties in Ohio. I am therefore asking that you immediately investigate this alleged misconduct and that, among other things, you consider the immediate impoundment of election machinery to prevent any further tampering.

On December 13, my staff met with Ms. Eaton who explained to them that last Friday, December 10, Michael Barbian, Jr., a representative of Triad GSI unilaterally sought and obtained access to the voting machinery and records in Hocking County, Ohio, modified the computer tabulator, learned which precinct was planned to be the subject of the initial test recount and made further alterations based on that information, and advised the election officials how to manipulate the machinery so that the preliminary hand recount matched the machine count. Ms. Eaton first relayed this information to Green Party representatives, and then completed, signed and notarized an affidavit describing this course of events, a copy of which is attached.

The Triad official sought access to the voting machinery based on the apparent pretext that he wanted to review some "legal questions" the officials might receive as part of the recount process. At several times during this visit, Mr. Barbian telephoned into Triad's offices to obtain programming information relating to the machinery and the precinct in question. I have subsequently learned that Triad officials have been, or are in the process of intervening in several other counties in Ohio - Greene and Monroe, and perhaps others (see attached).

There are several important considerations you should be aware of with respect to this matter. First, this course of conduct would appear to violate several provisions of federal law, in addition to the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. 42 U.S.C. §1973 provides for criminal penalties against any person who, in any election for federal office, "knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by . . . the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held." 42 U.S.C. § 1974 also requires the retention and preservation, for a period of twenty-two months from the date of a federal election, of all voting records and papers and makes it a felony for any person to "willfully steal, destroy, conceal, mutilate, or alter" any such record. Further, any tampering with ballots and/or election machinery would violate the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote and have their votes properly counted, as guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Second, the course of conduct would also appear to violate several provisions of Ohio law. No less than 4 provisions of the Ohio Revised Code make it a felony to tamper with or destroy election records or machines.1 Clearly, modifying election equipment in order to make sure that the hand count matches the machine count would appear to fall within these proscriptions.

Moreover, bringing in Triad officials into other Ohio Counties would also appear to violate Ohio Revised Code § 3505.32 which provides that during a period of official canvassing, all interaction with ballots must be "in the presence of all of the members of the board and any other persons who are entitled to witness the official canvass," given that last Friday, the Ohio Secretary of State has issued orders to the effect that election officials are to treat all election materials as if they were in a period of canvassing,2 and that "Teams of one Democrat and one Republican must be present with ballots at all times of processing."

Third, it is important to recognize that the companies implicated in the wrongdoing, Triad and its affiliates, are the leading suppliers of voting machines involving the counting of paper ballots and punch cards in the critical states of Ohio and Florida. Triad is controlled by the Rapp family, and its founder Tod A. Rapp has been a consistent contributor to Republican causes.4 A Triad affiliate, Psephos corporation, supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the 2000 presidential election.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.

Enclosures

cc: The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The New York Times published a report on the matter late Tuesday night:

Lawmaker Seeks Inquiry Into Ohio Vote
By Tom Zeller Jr.
The New York Times

Wednesday 15 December 3004

The ranking Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, plans to ask the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a county prosecutor in Ohio today to explore "inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering" in at least one and perhaps several Ohio counties.

The request for an investigation, made in a letter that was also provided to The New York Times, includes accounts from at least two county employees, but is based largely on a sworn affidavit provided by the Hocking County deputy director of elections, Sherole Eaton.

Among other things, Ms. Eaton says in her affidavit that a representative of Triad Governmental Systems, the Ohio firm that created and maintains the vote-counting software in dozens of Ohio counties, made several adjustments to the Hocking County tabulator last Friday, in advance of the state's recount, which is taking place this week.

Ohio recount rules require that only 3 percent of a county's votes be tallied by hand, and typically one or more whole precincts are selected and combined to get the 3 percent sample. After the hand count, the sample is fed into the tabulator. If there is no discrepancy, the remaining ballots can be counted by the machine. Otherwise, a hand recount must be done for the whole county.

Ms. Eaton contends that the Triad employee asked which precinct Hocking County planned to count as its representative 3 percent, and, upon being told, made further adjustments to the machine.

County officials decided to use a different precinct when the recount was done yesterday. No discrepancies were found.

"This is pretty outrageous," Mr. Conyers said. "We want to pursue it as vigorously as we can."

But Brett Rapp, the president of Triad, said that although it would be unusual for an employee to ask about a specific precinct, preparing the machines for a recount was standard procedure and was done in all 41 counties where Triad handles vote counts. He added that he welcomed any investigation.

"I've been doing this since 1985, and in all my experience this is the first time that we have had any complaints whatsoever," Mr. Rapp said.

Green party leader says GOP donors have voting machine concerns, notes letter to discourage voters that mirrors Rove tactics

2004-12-18T03:07:00.000-06:00

Cobb details disenfranchisement tactics, says GOP donors concerned about voting machines

By Larisa Alexandrovna | RAW STORY Staff

In an exclusive interview with RAW STORY, Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb expressed concern about broad attempts made to disenfranchise voters in Ohio, and asserted that even Republican donors are concerned about the manipulating of voting machines.

Cobb raised allegations of voting machine tampering by Hocking County elections official Sherole Eaton at a public hearing Monday, which was reported in the New York Times.

Possible tampering, according to Cobb, has large Republican donors very concerned. While they will not go on the record, Cobb said they wanted a transparent and honest election.

Cobb enumerated myriad issues in Ohio which have gone largely unreported. He cited longtime voters being taken off rolls, bogus letters and attempts to keep African Americans and college students from voting.

Some African American voters in Ohio received letters on NAACP letterhead telling them the wrong day to vote.

“African American voters received letters on stolen NAACP letterhead claiming that because of the expected high turnout, Republicans were asked to vote on Tuesday Nov. 2 and all other parties were being asked to vote on Thursday Nov. 4,” Cobb said.

Similarly, some Florida seniors received a letter directing them to vote on November third. Republicans have largely denied all such letters and calls, blaming Democrats instead of dirty tricks.

However, stealing letterhead and using it for political purposes mirrors a tactic of top presidential advisor Karl Rove.

The F Word

2004-12-17T23:12:00.000-06:00

At the center of the debate one finds Diebold Elections Systems, Inc. and Election System and Software, Inc. (ES&S), the top two producers of electronic voting equipment in the country. Yet the companies are probably not so much competitors as cohorts. Why would two huge companies in the same industry be bedfellows? Because the president of Diebold Election Systems is Robert Urosevich, and the vice president of election services at ES&S is his brother, Todd. Together, the two companies’ equipment tallied an estimated 80 percent of the popular vote in this year’s election. Curiously enough, besides sharing a bloodline, the brothers’ companies seem to be plagued by the same problem: an apparently hereditary inability to comply with state and federal voting regulations.

The World According to Diebold?

2004-12-17T22:36:00.000-06:00

With the various issues surrounding Diebold voting machines I have done some digging into their use throughout the election.

From the Diebold website:

Over 75,000 Diebold electronic voting stations are being used in locations across the United States to assist voters in exercising their most fundamental constitutional right: The right to vote.

They also mention a report by the State of Georgia Secratary of State, Cathy Cox which states in part:

". . .Diebold system produced a significant reduction in the residual vote rate throughout the state of Georgia. Just as important, the implementation of the new machines removed gaping disparities in voting machine reliability that could have raised serious questions about the fairness of Georgia’s electoral system. . ." Source: GA Press Release

We might also mention that when you visit the Cathy Cox webiste the tag ine is, ". . .advancing the e-government revolution.".

Why the Republicans want Cox to switch parties

Gwinnett Daily Post
Cathy Cox may be to the Georgia Democratic Party in the next election what Gen. Patton was to the 101st Airborne in World War II. She may be the Democrats’ last hope of rescue.
The secretary of state is easily the most attractive Democratic officeholder to survive the last election. Along with Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor, she is the only Democrat with a prayer of winning the 2006 election against Gov. Sonny Perdue.
Perdue’s competence and personality (or lack thereof) are not the essential ingredients in his re-election bid. His strength lies in the growing popularity of Republicanism that cuts across nearly all segments of Georgia’s electorate.
Except for black voters, Georgians are enthralled by the GOP. Look at the Nov. 2 election results. President Bush triumphed. Republicans won a House majority and expanded their Senate majority. Republican Congressman Johnny Isakson ran away with the Senate election. The GOP-backed gay-marriage ban carried the day. What Republicans wanted, Republicans mostly got.
Still, something is missing. The party includes no single commanding presence, no one who can rally the elephants round the flag, no one who stands above all other politicians to call for action. No one with star power.
Bo Callaway is off the scope. Newt Gingrich has vanished. Linda Schrenko is under indictment. As a magnetic leader, Perdue won’t do. Nor will Insurance Commissioner John “Mystery Merger” Oxendine.
So what are Republicans to do to fill that yawning personality gap in their leadership ranks?
Some leading Republicans have a surefire answer. Induce Secretary of State Cox to forget her Democratic rescue mission and join the GOP. She has not quite rebuffed their advances.
Here is the deal they have proffered:
n Cox would switch to the Republican Party and immediately announce for lieutenant governor in 2006. She would run to succeed Democrat Mark Taylor, presently a wide-open candidate for governor against Perdue.
n In exchange for switching, Cox would be richly rewarded. Top-rung Republicans — the ones with the fattest wallets and most generous hearts — would discourage other GOP members from entering the lieutenant governor’s fray.
Commissioner Oxendine, who has hinted he will run for lieutenant governor, would be pressed to seek re-election to his present post. State Sen. Casey Cagle of Gainesville would be offered goodies to keep him from moving. Cox would be the toast of the Georgia GOP. She would campaign right alongside Gov. Perdue, who once tried to evict her from the Capitol. She would lead an onslaught against the remaining Democratic officeholders Attorney General Thurbert Baker, Agriculture Commissioner Tommy Irvin, Labor Commissioner Michael Thurmond and, of course, Lt. Gov. Taylor, the candidate for governor.
n When the dust settled, Georgia government would be fully under GOP control. Lt. Gov.-elect Cathy Cox would prepare to run for governor in 2010. A re-elected Gov. Perdue, who cannot legally seek a third term, would be ready and willing to help Cox raise campaign funds and discourage other Republicans from making the 2010 governor’s race.
Nearly overnight, Cathy Cox could become the Joan of Arc of Georgia Republicanism, the American Idol of the Deep South — the bright light the GOP needs to guide it to permanent power. For instance, Cox’s value in attracting more women voters to Republican ranks would be unsurpassed. She also is a favorite of the elderly, the state’s other king-sized voting bloc.
We called Cox to see how thrilled she is at the invitation to switch parties and move up the electoral ladder. “Who knows where this might lead?” we mused. “The governor’s office could turn out to be just a temporary stopping place. Cathy could keep going, on to Washington. Why, heck, she could be the Republican equivalent of Hillary.”
On the phone, she didn’t sound as jubilant as we expected. Instead, she seemed sort of blah about the whole thing. She confirmed that Republicans had offered the above-described arrangement. And, yes, she has a number of Republican friends who like the idea of her switching. She mentioned GOP state Chairman Alex Poitevint, who lives in Bainbridge, Cox’s hometown. No, she would not confirm whether high-powered lobbyist Joe Tanner had acted as a go-between.
She also mentioned that her cell phone connection was fading. She said she’d talk to me later. She wanted to think.
She may have remembered the Great Republican Deal of 1986 when GOP leaders promised not to back any high-powered candidate against Democratic Gov. Joe Frank Harris. In return, Democrats would decline to put up a viable candidate against Republican Sen. Mack Mattingly. All parties said OK. The deal fell apart anyway. Harris won; Mattingly didn’t. Georgia’s first elected Republican senator fell to the most liberal Democrat in the state, Wyche Fowler, who had plenty of support.
Then there was the time Republicans crossed over and flooded the 1966 Democratic primary to vote for Lester Maddox. They were certain that Maddox could never be elected governor. Ergo, the Republicans would win automatically. Didn’t happen. Maddox became governor.
As she reviews those arcane ploys of yesteryear, she may think of the one enduring characteristic of the Grand Old Party of Georgia: Its deals never work. That is part, albeit a small part, of the reason that Cathy Cox will remain a Democrat and challenge Perdue for governor in 2006.

Testimony: Diebold tampered with voting machines

2004-12-17T22:23:00.000-06:00

On behalf of a group of Ohio voters, attorney Clifford Arnebeck filed an emergency motion for an expedited emergency hearing and to prevent voting companies and Ohio officials from further tampering with voting machines in the state during the recount, RAW STORY has learned.
Included in Arnebeck's motion is a two-page testimony taken in the presence of a court reporter where alleged witness Catherine Buchanan says she was told Diebold reprogrammed voting machines while present at her local Board of Elections.

"They told us that Diebolt [sic] was coming to reprogram the computer, which doesn't make any sense. I mean, if you're going to calibrate a machine, you calibrate it before you're going to do testing to make sure it's going to be okay," Buchanan asserts.

Court Approves Diebold Settlement Agreement With State of California

2004-12-17T21:52:00.000-06:00

NORTH CANTON, Ohio, Dec. 17 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- A California court

today approved the settlement agreement between Diebold, Incorporated, and the

State of California and Alameda County in their civil action against the

company and Diebold Election Systems, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary. As

previously disclosed, terms of the settlement consist of a total $2.6 million

payment to the state, which includes a $100,000 payment to Alameda County.  A

portion of the settlement also includes $500,000 to help form a voter

education and poll worker training program in California coordinated through

the University of California Institute of Governmental Studies.  Additionally,

Diebold has agreed to certain technology and reporting obligations that will

provide election officials with a better understanding of the most effective

manner of implementing its elections systems.

Costs related to this civil action, including the $2.6 million reserve for

the settlement payment and costs related to product recertification, legal and

other expenses, were included in the company's third quarter results.  As

previously disclosed, these costs had a $0.05 impact on earnings in the third

quarter.  The company also previously disclosed it anticipates an additional

$0.01 per share of expense in the fourth quarter related to resolving this

matter.

Diebold Election Systems, Inc. is a wholly owned operating subsidiary of

Diebold, Incorporated, a global leader in providing integrated self-service

delivery systems and services.  Headquartered in McKinney, Texas, Diebold

Election Systems provides high-quality voting technology to jurisdictions of

all sizes, along with comprehensive service and support capability, and is

committed to elections accuracy, security and integrity.  For more information

on Diebold Election Systems, visit the company's Web site

at http://www.dieboldes.com , or call 1-800-433-VOTE.

Diebold, Incorporated is a global leader in providing integrated self-

service delivery systems, security and services.  Diebold employs more than

13,000 associates with representation in nearly 90 countries worldwide and is

headquartered in Canton, Ohio, USA.  Diebold reported revenue of $2.1 billion

in 2003 and is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symboldd

"DBD."  For more information, visit http://www.diebold.com .

WHISTLEBLOWER AFFIDAVIT: Programmer Built Vote Rigging Prototype at Republican Congressman's Request!

2004-12-17T21:35:00.000-06:00

In stunning revelations set to rock the vote from Tallahassee to Capitol Hill -- and perhaps even a bit further up Pennsylvania Avenue -- a Florida computer programmer has now made remarkable claims in a detailed sworn affidavit,
signed this morning and obtained exclusively by The BRAD BLOG!

- Affidavit in .PDF format - (Generously hosted by Raw Story!)

The programmer claims that he designed and built a "vote rigging" software program at the behest of then Florida Congressman, now U.S. Congressman, Republican Tom Feeney of Florida's 24th Congressional District.

Clint Curtis, 46, claims that he built the software for Feeney in 2000 while working at a sofware design and engineering company in Oviedo, Florida (Feeney's home district).

Curtis, in his affidavit, says that as technical advisor and programmer at Yang Enterprises, Inc. (YEI) he was present at company meetings where Feeney was present "on at least a dozen occasions".

Feeney, who had run in 1994 as Jeb Bush's running-mate in his initial unsuccessful bid for Florida Governor, was serving as both corporate counsel and registered lobbyist for YEI during the period that Curtis worked at the company. Feeney was also concurrently serving as a Florida state congressman while performing those services for YEI. Feeney would eventually become Speaker of the Florida House before being elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2002. He is now a member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee.

At an October 2000 meeting with Feeney, according to the affidavit and BRAD BLOG interviews with Curtis over the past three days, Feeney inquired whether the company could build a "vote fraud software prototype".

At least three YEI employees are said to have been present at that meeting; Curtis, company owner, Mrs. Li Woan Yang, and her executive secretary, Mike Cohen. Two other YEI employees may have come in and out at different points of the meeting according to Curtis.

Curtis says that Feeney "was very specific in the design and specifications required for this program."

"He detailed, in his own words, that; (a) the program needed to be touch-screen capable (b) the user should be able to trigger the program without any additional equipment (c) the programming to accomplish this needed to stay hidden even if the source code was inspected."

Though there was no problem with the first two requirements, Curtis explained to the Congressman that it would be "virtually impossible to hide such code written to change the voting results if anyone is able to review the uncompiled source code"

Nonetheless, he was asked at the meeting by Mrs. Yang to build the prototype anyway.

Curtis, "a life-long Republican" at the time, claims that it was his initial belief that Feeney's interest was in trying to stop Democrats from using "such a program to steal an election". Curtis had assumed that Feeney, "wanted to be able to detect and prevent that if it occurred."