START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
Group Discussions
label:  
  Blue Label
| track thread
« Back to topics
More on voter irregularities
11 years ago
| Blue Label
We can all spend a lot of time discussing what Kerry and the Democratic party did wrong in this election. We can discuss the repug politics of fear and the media's lack of responsible journalism. But until someone seriously looks into this, nothing else will matter. As some of you know, I've been writing, talking, screaming about this for a long time. No one seems to be taking much interest in looking into this at all. My suggestion is to send articles and web links to all your friends and ask everyone to contact the Democratic party, their elected officials, their local papers and anyone else they can think of. This will not go away. After the fiasco of 2000, no one even bothered to at least try to get paper receipts. My god, your ATM machine gives you a receipt! Your bank doesn't say it costs too much money and 'you'll just have to trust us'. Even if they did, you'd at least get a bank statement showing your transactions in the mail every month. Here we just fly blind and are expected to trust people with the most valuable asset we have...our voice. Nothing we do will ever matter in the long run if our ability to choose the leadership of this country is so severely broken and subject to manipulation. I suggest we use this thread to post whatever information we find about voter fraud and black box voting and use this information to inundate officials and major newspapers with letters demanding an investigation until something is done. Harmony has a lot of wonderful links and information under the 'Reforming Our Democracy' thread (http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=1972&pst=14328) But this is so important, I don't want it to get buried under other things, so I think it's a good idea to keep one thread for anything about voter fraud. Find out where to write your officials: http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/ - find out where to write your officials Bev Harris' group blackbox.org - the BEST source for electronic voter fraud http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ BREAKING -- SUNDAY Nov. 7 2004: Freedom of Information requests at http://www.blackboxvoting.org have unearthed two Ciber certification reports indicating that security and tamperability was NOT TESTED and that several state elections directors, a secretary of state, and computer consultant Dr. Britain Williams signed off on the report anyway, certifying it. Black Box Voting has taken the position that fraud took place in the 2004 election through electronic voting machines. We base this on hard evidence, documents obtained in public records requests, inside information, and other data indicative of manipulation of electronic voting systems. What we do not know is the specific scope of the fraud. We are working now to compile the proof, based not on soft evidence -- red flags, exit polls -- but core documents obtained by Black Box Voting in the most massive Freedom of Information action in history. -------------------- Machine Error Gives Bush Extra Ohio Votes Source: Yahoo, Nov 5, 2004 By JOHN McCARTHY, Associated Press Writer COLUMBUS, Ohio - An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush (news - web sites) 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said. Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites)'s 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Bush's total should have been recorded as 365. Bush won the state by more than 136,000 votes, according to unofficial results, and Kerry conceded the election on Wednesday after saying that 155,000 provisional ballots yet to be counted in Ohio would not change the result. Deducting the erroneous Bush votes from his total could not change the election's outcome, and there were no signs of other errors in Ohio's electronic machines, said Carlo LoParo, spokesman for Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell. Franklin is the only Ohio county to use Danaher Controls Inc.'s ELECTronic 1242, an older-style touchscreen voting system. Danaher did not immediately return a message for comment. Sean Greene, research director with the nonpartisan Election Reform Information Project, said that while the glitch appeared minor "that could change if more of these stories start coming out." In one North Carolina county, more than 4,500 votes were lost in this election because officials mistakenly believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did. And in San Francisco, a malfunction with custom voting software could delay efforts to declare the winners of four races for county supervisor. In the Ohio precinct in question, the votes are recorded to eight memory locations, including a removable cartridge, according to Verified Voting Foundation, an e-voting watchdog group. After voting ends, the cartridge is either transported to a tabulation facility or its data sent via modem. Kimball Brace, president of the consulting firm Election Data Services, said it's possible the fault lies with the software that tallies the votes from individual cartridges rather than the machines or the cartridges themselves. Either way, he said, such tallying software ought to have a way to ensure that the totals don't exceed the number of voters. County officials did not return calls seeking details. Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, told The Columbus Dispatch that on one of the three machines at that precinct, a malfunction occurred when its cartridge was plugged into a reader and generated a faulty number. He could not explain how the malfunction occurred. Damschroder said people who had seen poll results on the election board's Web site called to point out the discrepancy. The error would have been discovered when the official count for the election is performed later this month, he said. The reader also recorded zero votes in a county commissioner race on the machine. Other electronic machines used in Ohio do not use the type of computer cartridge involved in the error, state officials say. But in Perry County, a punch-card system reported about 75 more votes than there are voters in one precinct. Workers tried to cancel the count when the tabulator broke down midway through, but the machine instead double-counted an unknown number in the first batch. The mistake will be corrected, officials say. Meanwhile, in San Francisco, a glitch occurred with software designed by Election Systems & Software Inc. for the city's new "ranked-choice voting," in which voters list their top three choices for municipal offices. If no candidate gets a majority of first-place votes outright, voters' second and third-place preferences are then distributed among candidates who weren't eliminated in the first round. When the San Francisco Department of Elections tried a test run Wednesday, some of the votes didn't get counted. The problem was attributed to a programming glitch that limited how much data could be accepted, a threshold that did not account for high voter turnout.
11 years ago
Published on Saturday, November 6, 2004 by CommonDreams.org Evidence Mounts That The Vote Was Hacked by Thom Hartmann When I spoke with Jeff Fisher this morning (Saturday, November 06, 2004), the Democratic candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Florida's 16th District said he was waiting for the FBI to show up. Fisher has evidence, he says, not only that the Florida election was hacked, but of who hacked it and how. And not just this year, he said, but that these same people had previously hacked the Democratic primary race in 2002 so that Jeb Bush would not have to run against Janet Reno, who presented a real threat to Jeb, but instead against Bill McBride, who Jeb beat. "It was practice for a national effort," Fisher told me. And evidence is accumulating that the national effort happened on November 2, 2004. The State of Florida, for example, publishes a county-by-county record of votes cast and people registered to vote by party affiliation. Net denizen Kathy Dopp compiled the official state information into a table, available at http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm, and noticed something startling. Also See: Florida Secretary of State Presidential Results by County 11/02/2004 (.pdf) http://election.dos.state.fl.us/pdf/canvassing1.pdf Florida Secretary of State County Registration by Party 2/9/2004 (.pdf) http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voterreg/pdf/2004/2004pppParty.pdf While the heavily scrutinized touch-screen voting machines seemed to produce results in which the registered Democrat/Republican ratios matched the Kerry/Bush vote, and so did the optically-scanned paper ballots in the larger counties, in Florida's smaller counties the results from the optically scanned paper ballots - fed into a central tabulator PC and thus vulnerable to hacking - seem to have been reversed. In Baker County, for example, with 12,887 registered voters, 69.3% of them Democrats and 24.3% of them Republicans, the vote was only 2,180 for Kerry and 7,738 for Bush, the opposite of what is seen everywhere else in the country where registered Democrats largely voted for Kerry. In Dixie County, with 4,988 registered voters, 77.5% of them Democrats and a mere 15% registered as Republicans, only 1,959 people voted for Kerry, but 4,433 voted for Bush. The pattern repeats over and over again - but only in the smaller counties where, it was probably assumed, the small voter numbers wouldn't be much noticed. Franklin County, 77.3% registered Democrats, went 58.5% for Bush. Holmes County, 72.7% registered Democrats, went 77.25% for Bush. Yet in the larger counties, where such anomalies would be more obvious to the news media, high percentages of registered Democrats equaled high percentages of votes for Kerry. More visual analysis of the results can be seen at http://ustogether.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm, and www.rubberbug.com/temp/Florida2004chart.htm http://www.rubberbug.com/temp/Florida2004chart.htm . And, although elections officials didn't notice these anomalies, in aggregate they were enough to swing Florida from Kerry to Bush. If you simply go through the analysis of these counties and reverse the "anomalous" numbers in those counties that appear to have been hacked, suddenly the Florida election results resemble the Florida exit poll results: Kerry won, and won big. Those exit poll results have been a problem for reporters ever since Election Day. Election night, I'd been doing live election coverage for WDEV, one of the radio stations that carries my syndicated show, and, just after midnight, during the 12:20 a.m. Associated Press Radio News feed, I was startled to hear the reporter detail how Karen Hughes had earlier sat George W. Bush down to inform him that he'd lost the election. The exit polls were clear: Kerry was winning in a landslide. "Bush took the news stoically," noted the AP report. But then the computers reported something different. In several pivotal states. Conservatives see a conspiracy here: They think the exit polls were rigged. Dick Morris, the infamous political consultant to the first Clinton campaign who became a Republican consultant and Fox News regular, wrote an article for The Hill http://www.thehill.com/morris/110404.aspx , the publication read by every political junkie in Washington, DC, in which he made a couple of brilliant points. "Exit Polls are almost never wrong," Morris wrote. "They eliminate the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly separating actual voters from those who pretend they will cast ballots but never do and by substituting actual observation for guesswork in judging the relative turnout of different parts of the state." He added: "So, according to ABC-TVs exit polls, for example, Kerry was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and Iowa, all of which Bush carried. The only swing state the network had going to Bush was West Virginia, which the president won by 10 points." Yet a few hours after the exit polls were showing a clear Kerry sweep, as the computerized vote numbers began to come in from the various states the election was called for Bush. How could this happen? On the CNBC TV show "Topic A With Tina Brown," several months ago, Howard Dean had filled in for Tina Brown as guest host. His guest was Bev Harris, the Seattle grandmother who started www.blackboxvoting.org http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ from her living room. Bev pointed out that regardless of how votes were tabulated (other than hand counts, only done in odd places like small towns in Vermont), the real "counting" is done by computers. Be they Diebold Opti-Scan machines, which read paper ballots filled in by pencil or ink in the voter's hand, or the scanners that read punch cards, or the machines that simply record a touch of the screen, in all cases the final tally is sent to a "central tabulator" machine. That central tabulator computer is a Windows-based PC. "In a voting system," Harris explained to Dean on national television, "you have all the different voting machines at all the different polling places, sometimes, as in a county like mine, there's a thousand polling places in a single county. All those machines feed into the one machine so it can add up all the votes. So, of course, if you were going to do something you shouldn't to a voting machine, would it be more convenient to do it to each of the 4000 machines, or just come in here and deal with all of them at once?" Dean nodded in rhetorical agreement, and Harris continued. "What surprises people is that the central tabulator is just a PC, like what you and I use. It's just a regular computer." "So," Dean said, "anybody who can hack into a PC can hack into a central tabulator?" Harris nodded affirmation, and pointed out how Diebold uses a program called GEMS, which fills the screen of the PC and effectively turns it into the central tabulator system. "This is the official program that the County Supervisor sees," she said, pointing to a PC that was sitting between them loaded with Diebold's software. Bev then had Dean open the GEMS program to see the results of a test election. They went to the screen titled "Election Summary Report" and waited a moment while the PC "adds up all the votes from all the various precincts," and then saw that in this faux election Howard Dean had 1000 votes, Lex Luthor had 500, and Tiger Woods had none. Dean was winning. "Of course, you can't tamper with this software," Harris noted. Diebold wrote a pretty good program. But, it's running on a Windows PC. So Harris had Dean close the Diebold GEMS software, go back to the normal Windows PC desktop, click on the "My Computer" icon, choose "Local Disk C:," open the folder titled GEMS, and open the sub-folder "LocalDB" which, Harris noted, "stands for local database, that's where they keep the votes." Harris then had Dean double-click on a file in that folder titled "Central Tabulator Votes," which caused the PC to open the vote count in a database program like Excel. In the "Sum of the Candidates" row of numbers, she found that in one precinct Dean had received 800 votes and Lex Luthor had gotten 400. "Let's just flip those," Harris said, as Dean cut and pasted the numbers from one cell into the other. "And," she added magnanimously, "let's give 100 votes to Tiger." They closed the database, went back into the official GEMS software "the legitimate way, you're the county supervisor and you're checking on the progress of your election." As the screen displayed the official voter tabulation, Harris said, "And you can see now that Howard Dean has only 500 votes, Lex Luthor has 900, and Tiger Woods has 100." Dean, the winner, was now the loser. Harris sat up a bit straighter, smiled, and said, "We just edited an election, and it took us 90 seconds." On live national television. (You can see the clip on www.votergate.tv http://www.votergate.tv/ .) Which brings us back to Morris and those pesky exit polls that had Karen Hughes telling George W. Bush that he'd lost the election in a landslide. Morris's conspiracy theory is that the exit polls "were sabotage" to cause people in the western states to not bother voting for Bush, since the networks would call the election based on the exit polls for Kerry. But the networks didn't do that, and had never intended to. It makes far more sense that the exit polls were right - they weren't done on Diebold PCs - and that the vote itself was hacked. And not only for the presidential candidate - Jeff Fisher thinks this hit him and pretty much every other Democratic candidate for national office in the most-hacked swing states. So far, the only national "mainstream" media to come close to this story was Keith Olbermann on his show Friday night, November 5th, when he noted that it was curious that all the voting machine irregularities so far uncovered seem to favor Bush. In the meantime, the Washington Post and other media are now going through single-bullet-theory-like contortions to explain how the exit polls had failed. But I agree with Fox's Dick Morris on this one, at least in large part. Wrapping up his story for The Hill, Morris wrote in his final paragraph, "This was no mere mistake. Exit polls cannot be as wrong across the board as they were on election night. I suspect foul play." Thom Hartmann (thom at thomhartmann.com) is a Project Censored Award-winning best-selling author and host of a nationally syndicated daily progressive talk show. www.thomhartmann .com http://www.thomhartmann.com/commondreams.shtml
Thanks
11 years ago
This is a pretty amazing collection of links -- and I'm only half-way through.
11 years ago
  Kerry Won
    By Greg Palast
    TomPaine.com

    Thursday 04 November 2004

    Kerry won. Here's the facts.

    I know you don't want to hear it. You can't face one more hung chad. But I don't have a choice. As a journalist examining that messy sausage called American democracy, it's my job to tell you who got the most votes in the deciding states. Tuesday, in Ohio and New Mexico, it was John Kerry.

    Most voters in Ohio thought they were voting for Kerry. CNN's exit poll showed Kerry beating Bush among Ohio women by 53 percent to 47 percent. Kerry also defeated Bush among Ohio's male voters 51 percent to 49 percent. Unless a third gender voted in Ohio, Kerry took the state.

    So what's going on here? Answer: the exit polls are accurate. Pollsters ask, "Who did you vote for?" Unfortunately, they don't ask the crucial, question, "Was your vote counted?" The voters don't know.

    Here's why. Although the exit polls show that most voters in Ohio punched cards for Kerry-Edwards, thousands of these votes were simply not recorded. This was predictable and it was predicted. [See TomPaine.com, "An Election Spoiled Rotten," November 1.]

    Once again, at the heart of the Ohio uncounted vote game are, I'm sorry to report, hanging chads and pregnant chads, plus some other ballot tricks old and new.

    The election in Ohio was not decided by the voters but by something called "spoilage." Typically in the United States, about 3 percent of the vote is voided, just thrown away, not recorded. When the bobble-head boobs on the tube tell you Ohio or any state was won by 51 percent to 49 percent, don't you believe it ... it has never happened in the United States, because the total never reaches a neat 100 percent. The television totals simply subtract out the spoiled vote.

    And not all vote spoil equally. Most of those votes, say every official report, come from African American and minority precincts. (To learn more, click here.)

    We saw this in Florida in 2000. Exit polls showed Gore with a plurality of at least 50,000, but it didn't match the official count. That's because the official, Secretary of State Katherine Harris, excluded 179,855 spoiled votes. In Florida, as in Ohio, most of these votes lost were cast on punch cards where the hole wasn't punched through completely-leaving a 'hanging chad,'-or was punched extra times. Whose cards were discarded? Expert statisticians investigating spoilage for the government calculated that 54 percent of the ballots thrown in the dumpster were cast by black folks. (To read the report from the U.S. Civil Rights Commission, click here.)

    And here's the key: Florida is terribly typical. The majority of ballots thrown out (there will be nearly 2 million tossed out from Tuesday's election) will have been cast by African American and other minority citizens.

    So here we go again. Or, here we don't go again. Because unlike last time, Democrats aren't even asking Ohio to count these cards with the not-quite-punched holes (called "undervotes" in the voting biz).

    Ohio is one of the last states in America to still use the vote-spoiling punch-card machines. And the Secretary of State of Ohio, J. Kenneth Blackwell, wrote before the election, “the possibility of a close election with punch cards as the state’s primary voting device invites a Florida-like calamity.”

    But this week, Blackwell, a rabidly partisan Republican, has warmed up to the result of sticking with machines that have a habit of eating Democratic votes. When asked if he feared being this year's Katherine Harris, Blackwell noted that Ms. Fix-it's efforts landed her a seat in Congress.

    Exactly how many votes were lost to spoilage this time? Blackwell's office, notably, won't say, though the law requires it be reported. Hmm. But we know that last time, the total of Ohio votes discarded reached a democracy-damaging 1.96 percent. The machines produced their typical loss-that's 110,000 votes-overwhelmingly Democratic.

    The Impact Of Challenges

    First and foremost, Kerry was had by chads. But the Democrat wasn't punched out by punch cards alone. There were also the 'challenges.' That's a polite word for the Republican Party of Ohio's use of an old Ku Klux Klan technique: the attempt to block thousands of voters of color at the polls. In Ohio, Wisconsin and Florida, the GOP laid plans for poll workers to ambush citizens under arcane laws-almost never used-allowing party-designated poll watchers to finger individual voters and demand they be denied a ballot. The Ohio courts were horrified and federal law prohibits targeting of voters where race is a factor in the challenge. But our Supreme Court was prepared to let Republicans stand in the voting booth door.

    In the end, the challenges were not overwhelming, but they were there. Many apparently resulted in voters getting these funky "provisional" ballots-a kind of voting placebo-which may or may not be counted. Blackwell estimates there were 175,000; Democrats say 250,000. Pick your number. But as challenges were aimed at minorities, no one doubts these are, again, overwhelmingly Democratic. Count them up, add in the spoiled punch cards (easy to tally with the human eye in a recount), and the totals begin to match the exit polls; and, golly, you've got yourself a new president. Remember, Bush won by 136,483 votes in Ohio.

    Enchanted State's Enchanted Vote

    Now, on to New Mexico, where a Kerry plurality-if all votes are counted-is more obvious still. Before the election, in TomPaine.com, I wrote, "John Kerry is down by several thousand votes in New Mexico, though not one ballot has yet been counted."

    How did that happen? It's the spoilage, stupid; and the provisional ballots.

    CNN said George Bush took New Mexico by 11,620 votes. Again, the network total added up to that miraculous, and non-existent, '100 percent' of ballots cast.

    New Mexico reported in the last race a spoilage rate of 2.68 percent, votes lost almost entirely in Hispanic, Native American and poor precincts-Democratic turf. From Tuesday's vote, assuming the same ballot-loss rate, we can expect to see 18,000 ballots in the spoilage bin.

    Spoilage has a very Democratic look in New Mexico. Hispanic voters in the Enchanted State, who voted more than two to one for Kerry, are five times as likely to have their vote spoil as a white voter. Counting these uncounted votes would easily overtake the Bush 'plurality.'

    Already, the election-bending effects of spoilage are popping up in the election stats, exactly where we'd expect them: in heavily Hispanic areas controlled by Republican elections officials. Chaves County, in the "Little Texas" area of New Mexico, has a 44 percent Hispanic population, plus African Americans and Native Americans, yet George Bush "won" there 68 percent to 31 percent.

    I spoke with Chaves' Republican county clerk before the election, and he told me that this huge spoilage rate among Hispanics simply indicated that such people simply can't make up their minds on the choice of candidate for president. Oddly, these brown people drive across the desert to register their indecision in a voting booth.

    Now, let's add in the effect on the New Mexico tally of provisional ballots.

    "They were handing them out like candy," Albuquerque journalist Renee Blake reported of provisional ballots. About 20,000 were given out. Who got them?

    Santiago Juarez who ran the "Faithful Citizenship" program for the Catholic Archdiocese in New Mexico, told me that "his" voters, poor Hispanics, whom he identified as solid Kerry supporters, were handed the iffy provisional ballots. Hispanics were given provisional ballots, rather than the countable kind "almost religiously," he said, at polling stations when there was the least question about a voter's identification. Some voters, Santiago said, were simply turned away.

    Your Kerry Victory Party

    So we can call Ohio and New Mexico for John Kerry-if we count all the votes.

    But that won't happen. Despite the Democratic Party's pledge, the leadership this time gave in to racial disenfranchisement once again. Why? No doubt, the Democrats know darn well that counting all the spoiled and provisional ballots will require the cooperation of Ohio's Secretary of State, Blackwell. He will ultimately decide which spoiled and provisional ballots get tallied. Blackwell, hankering to step into Kate Harris' political pumps, is unlikely to permit anything close to a full count. Also, Democratic leadership knows darn well the media would punish the party for demanding a full count.

    What now? Kerry won, so hold your victory party. But make sure the shades are down: it may be become illegal to demand a full vote count under PATRIOT Act III.

    I used to write a column for the Guardian papers in London. Several friends have asked me if I will again leave the country. In light of the failure-a second time-to count all the votes, that won't be necessary. My country has left me.


    Greg Palast, contributing editor to Harper's magazine, investigated the manipulation of the vote for BBC Television's Newsnight. The documentary, "Bush Family Fortunes," based on his New York Times bestseller, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, has been released this month on DVD.

 

Worse Than 2000: Tuesday's Electoral Disaster
11 years ago

William Rivers Pitt http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_110804A.shtml Long article, VERY thorough, and well worth reading. Too long to put in here, unfortunately- and with many resource links. Many links to various voting irregularities. CLIP: Is there any evidence that these machines went haywire on Tuesday? Nationally, there were more than 1,100 reports of electronic voting machine malfunctions. http://www.whtm.com/news/stories/1104/184856.html A few examples: * In Broward County, Florida, election workers were shocked to discover that their shiny new machines were counting backwards. "Tallies should go up as more votes are counted," according to this report. "That's simple math. But in some races, the numbers had gone down. Officials found the software used in Broward can handle only 32,000 votes per precinct. After that, the system starts counting backward." http://www.palmbeachpost.com/politics/content/news/epaper/2004/11/05/a29a_BROW VOTE_1105.html * In Franklin County, Ohio, electronic voting machines gave Bush 3,893 extra votes in one precinct alone. "Franklin County's unofficial results gave Bush 4,258 votes to Democratic challenger John Kerry's 260 votes in Precinct 1B," according to this report. "Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Matthew Damschroder, director of the Franklin County Board of Elections, said Bush received 365 votes there. The other 13 voters who cast ballots either voted for other candidates or did not vote for president." http://www.ohio.com/mld/beaconjournal/news/state/10103910.htm * In Craven County, North Carolina, a software error on the electronic voting machines awarded Bush 11,283 extra votes. "The Elections Systems and Software equipment," according to this report, "had downloaded voting information from nine of the county's 26 precincts and as the absentee ballots were added, the precinct totals were added a second time. An override, like those occurring when one attempts to save a computer file that already exists,is supposed to prevent double counting, but did not function correctly." http://www.newbernsj.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.c fm&StoryID=18297&Section=Local * In Carteret County, North Carolina, "More than 4,500 votes may be lost in one North Carolina county because officials believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did. Local officials said UniLect Corp., the maker of the county's electronic voting system, told them that each storage unit could handle 10,500 votes, but the limit was actually 3,005 votes. Officials said 3,005 early votes were stored, but 4,530 were lost." http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4596394,00.html
11 years ago
Sorry, I just noticed that one of the links i just posted was a duplicate.

This was from my cousin on the other side of the family:

"It seems that there is now pretty clear evidence that Kerry actually won the election but was cheated by manipulation of the machines that have no possible vote verification. The exit poles accurately tracked with the reported results in districts where recounts are possible but diverged widely in favor of bush where no recounts are possible. Read and draw your own conclusions. Bill Here are a few Links to stories about the recent Vote Fraud and the stolen election. http://www.legitgov.org/pressrelease_stolen_election_2004_110404.html Citizens for Legitimate Government - The second group conducting a thorough investigation into 2004 Election Vote Fraud BREAKING NEWS - Through chicanery, lies, deception, polling intimidators (Brownshirts), Swift Boat Liars for Rove, Diebold, touch screen 'voting' machines, Kenneth Blackwell, Wally O'Dell, Therese LeGOPWhorePore, Dictator Bush now has 269 electoral votes, according to MSNBC. Why did exit polling indicate a Kerry victory? The same reason that exit polling indicated a Gore victory, in 2000: because Gore won. Another Bush coup d'etat is underway... http://www.senderberl.com/ *"SenderBerl is going to give you an important and grave responsibility. We are going to beg you to contact every Senator, Congressmen (in the hope that some honest ones remain), every newspaper, every Internet site, and anyone else you deem relevant to tell them how to prove the election fraud." (Excellent & extensive compilation of the HARD EVIDENCE) http://onlinejournal.com/evoting/110504Chin/110504chin.html *The stolen election of 2004: welcome back to hell - Nov. 5, How the Bush Election Machines were fraudulenly manipulated in 2002 & 2004 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/stolennation.html *A Stolen Nation - Excellent detailed summary, from the easily manipulated Voting Machines to who comes up with the numbers (TV Networks) http://www.gregpalast.com/ Kerry Won - It's my job to tell you who got the most votes in the deciding states. Tuesday, in Ohio and New Mexico, it was John Kerry. http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1104-38.htm The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy - Privatizing the Vote Counters, Nov. 4 article on Commondreams.com by Thomas Hartmann http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/3/52213/1921 Florida Numbers compared to 2000 numbers - Something is wrong! Detailed analysis by Daily Kos Weblog on Nov. 3 http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=980 More election theft stories - Large number of stories related to election theft and vote fraud in Election 2004 Check 'em out!

Take Action: Write your representative through Working Assets:
10 years ago
Urgent Alert: Investigate Electronic Voting Machines http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?itemid=18056
10 years ago

http://lnvb.westside.com/NewMexico/NewMexicoByCounty.html

 I have completed a county by county comparision of registered voters vs polls for the state of new mexico. The following anomalies were found First off, I am not a statistician, but forward this data for more expert interpretation. That said, there are a number of red flags that come up. The state is approximately 50% Democratic, 32% Republican, and the remaineder 15% unaffilated. As of 10 am 11/7/04 GW Bush is ahead by 6,939 votes. with 96% of precincts reporting. Statewide Republican turnout seems to run incredibly near 100%, Democratic turnout seems to hover at 60% except urban areas.

Media Matters for America
10 years ago
released the following today. It's true -- we all lose whenever a voter or voters are discouraged or prevented from voting. It's also true the media are lazy or, perhaps, just sheep! Beyond "conspiracy theories," election irregularities get scant media attention http://mediamatters.org/items/200411120011 On November 9, the Los Angeles Times reported a voting irregularity during the November 2 presidential election in Youngstown, Ohio, where equipment initially recorded a negative 25 million votes for one precinct. In the 24 hours following the story's appearance, only one television news show -- MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann -- mentioned the incident. Though articles about the prevalence of Internet-based "conspiracy theories" regarding voting irregularities have appeared in several major newspapers -- including The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Boston Globe -- these articles focused on general speculation about voter fraud rather than on the voting irregularities that actually occurred. Media Matters for America previously noted the failure of most television and cable news networks to report on the glitch in one suburban Ohio town's electronic voting system that resulted in 3,893 extra votes for President George W. Bush; the three media outlets cited above did cite that glitch as an incident that has fueled speculation about vote fraud, but each ignored the negative-25-million-vote episode and other irregularities. National Public Radio Washington correspondent Pam Fessler touched on "the minus-25 million votes that showed up on a cartridge in one Ohio precinct" in her November 12 report on electronic voting irregularities on NPR's Morning Edition. Fessler also recounted the story of an Ohio voter who "pressed the box for John Kerry" and was forced to seek assistance from a poll worker when the machine indicated a vote for Bush. Fessler noted that the voter "worries about all those who didn't get such help" and that, "[i]n fact, there were dozens of reports last week about voters pressing one candidate's name on an electronic touch-screen machine and having another name recorded." In her November 12 column in The Washington Post, titled "Worst Voter Error Is Apathy Toward Irregularities," columnist Donna Britt outlined how newsworthy reports of voting irregularities have been largely ignored by the media: [T]he much-publicized voting-machine error that gave Bush 4,258 votes in an Ohio precinct where only 638 people cast ballots preceded a flood of disturbing reports, ranging from the Florida voting machine that counted backward to the North Carolina computer that eliminated votes. ... Much of the media dismisses anxiety over such irregularities as grousing by poor-loser Democrats, rabid conspiracy theorists and pouters frustrated by Kerry's lightning-quick concession. ... The point isn't just which candidate won or lost. It's that we all lose when we ignore that thousands of Americans might have been discouraged or prevented from voting, or not had their votes count. And on the November 9 edition of MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann, host Olbermann asked Congressional Quarterly columnist and MSNBC political analyst Craig Crawford if "every news organization [gave] up on this story the moment John Kerry conceded the election?" Crawford offered this perspective: The glib answer, which is part of the truth, is I think everybody was tired after that election. And it was a grueling one. And so, since John Kerry -- and this is the second factor -- since John Kerry conceded, then there wasn't the great desire to run out to Columbus or wherever and try to figure this stuff out. And the concession is the key, because we're often wimps in the media. And we wait for other people to make charges, one political party or another, and then we investigate it. But this is the time to do this. There's still time before the results are certified. It doesn't mean it will change the outcome, but it is good, and I congratulate you for looking at some of these irregularities.
Television lock-down
10 years ago

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/11/303362.shtml

Patriotic CBS insider says that her corp. & others on "lock down" about Nov. 2 vote fraud!

On Friday I received a phone call from a good friend who works at CBS--I've known her for years and she is a Producer for some of the news programs, one well known one in particular. She tipped me off that the news media is in a "lock-down" and that there is to be no TV coverage of the real problems with voting on Nov. 2nd.

....
Then there's this
10 years ago

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240

3:05 p.m. ET

I swear: I'm on vacation (Keith Olbermann)

SECURE UNDISCLOSED LOCATION— Golly, I’ve never been the subject of a conspiracy theory before.

Yet, there it is, flying around the Internet under the byline of a Peter Coyote: that when I attempted to break the “lock-down” of coverage of the voting irregularities story in the media during Friday night’s edition of Countdown, I was fired, and left the studio in the middle of the program."

There's more. Steve, much as I'm believing it - I like Indymedia! - I guess we should watch this to see how it turns out. I certainly won't disregard it! I don't really doubt the lock-down for a minute, and think it's been going on for some time on various subjects. They want us to know what they want us to know and that's all. Hopefully, others will speak out like this producer without having to fear what will happen to them. I'm very interested to see what happens after the 22nd, when he's back from vacation.

GAO investigation
10 years ago

Columbus Dispatch, Thursday, November 25, 2004, p. A6

Complaint volume wins congressional probe of vote count

By Larry Margasak

ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON -- Congress' investigative agency has begun to look into the Nov. 2 vote count, including the handling of povisional ballots and malfunctions of voting machines.

The presidential results won't change, but the studies could lead to changes.

The Government Acocuntability Office usually begins investigations in response to specific requests from Congress, but the agency's head, Comptroller General David Walker, said the GAO acted on its own because of numerous complaints it received from around the country about ballot counting.

....

10 years ago

Our whole country is in a lock down. Bush controls everything from soup to nuts in the White House, will appoint whomever he wants to appoint to high office positions, and cares less about what we think.

He said he wants to reach out to the 55 Americans who did not vote for him. The only way he can reach out to us satisfactrorily is to step down, admit the election was a total fraud all across the country, however, he will not do that. He isn't finished rewarding his cronies for their support in getting him re-elected. The new Katherine Blackwell thinks he's going to get a seat in Congress like Katherine Harris did, but the problem with him getting a seat is going to be more difficult. Katherine was banging Jeb Bush on the side, though Jeb denies the affair. It doesn't take a genius to see what was going on. Since Blackwell wasn't banging Dubya he isn't going to get a seat in Congress. He might end up getting the shaft instead, and that would be a good thing.

No one paid attention to the potential fraud that had been reported last summer, especially when the Jeb Bush gestapo were hitting minority neighborhoods intimidating black voters. Nothing unusal about that though. Everyone knew the black vote would be deadly for Bush's re-election, so they just found another way to get it done, and get it done they did.

I disagree with Kerry's conceding as being etched in stone. It isn't, not by a long shot. Kerry's conceding is not legally binding and he can uncocede whenever he wants to and demand a hand couted recount. But then again it is like what was reported. The election commission will decide which ballots are counted. Many have already hit the shredder, and the voting machines with no paper trail, well you can forget about them. If the first count was wrong so will the second count. Yet all of this was predicted back in June, and no one did anything about it. Ken O'Dell kept his promise and gave the Ohio Republicans  what he promised. "I will gurantee Bush will win in Ohio. Ohioians aren't stupid, and they know it was rigged, but there isn't much that can be done it about now. The right wing have pulled off another scam, with Karl Rove at the helm pulling the strings. He knew where and how to hit, and he hit hard. But then he had been planning this since the 2000 election. If Karl Rove learned anything from Lee Atwater it was how to play dirty politics, stay on the attack, and lie like hell, and keep pushing the lie until it becomes truth.

Dan Rather of CBS is stepping down in light of the Bush AWOL affair, and that is not fair. 25 years washed down the drain, and Bush had something to do with this. I know he did, but I just can't prove it.

Our representatives in Congress and the Senate are outnumbered, we can send them mail until our fingers bleed from writing, but their hands are tied just as ours are. All we have is each other to piss and moan to. But at least we have eachother...

Conyers's letter to Ohio's Blackwell
10 years ago
An Innocent Thought!
10 years ago

Since the whole country is rushing into this outsourcing thingie, do you think it makes sense to outsource our vote recount efforts to the Ukrainians?

10 years ago
hmm, it seems Conyers' letter left out the bit where in Cuyahoga County they changed the rules of counting provisional ballots on November 9th and began discarding packets that left the date of birth blank .. something not a part of the original rules. This is hardly surprising considering how easy it is for Republicans to just change rules whenever they want .. as with a possible DeLay indictment.. but it seems worth mentioning. Or am I just being a nitpicking sour grapes liberal nutcase again Sam, since the voting is so corrupt there, don't see that it would be any different. Perhaps insourcing some of that wonderful outrage that brought the population into their streets would be a better idea
Terri, I Think That Was The Idea...
10 years ago
...stated in my usual convoluted way!
10 years ago
oh....lol! Sorry... I'm a bit slow sometimes
Anonymous
10 years ago

I personally called Triad and diebold, im sure no one would be interested in what they had to say to me though,,,but all ill say is they are running the show now,,First we have ben& Jerry, George and Gracie , and now we have the fabulous Traid /Diebold Brothers. I always wondered what happen to the Smothers Brothers.

 Did we rig the Iraqi election, nooo ,,,, the fabulous triad/diebold brothers did,, soon to be performing in Las vegas for a four week stay at the Mirage. Get it Mirage and voting?,,,lol

What I wonder
10 years ago
I have no answers but it is obvious the last two election did not work quite right.... what can we do to assure that when we elect our new respresentatives here soon that our vote DOES count and that it is registered the WAY we intended it to be? 
Falcon
10 years ago

Some suggestions to ensure that votes are counted correctly:

1) Electronic voting with a paper trail.

2) Establish autonomous, independent commissions to oversee elections in all states, to replace the partisan politicians who currently oversee them.

3) Work hard to have electoral observers in every polling precinct. As a first step, the political parties have to work to make sure this is done.

4) Open U.S: elections to international observers. We ask others to do this, why isn't it done in the United States?

5) Replace punch-card voting with more modern systems.

6) Educate voters about the mechanics of voting, so that all votes are counted. Since most votes that are rejected are in poor and minority areas, people in these areas must be instructed about the mechanics of voting.

7) Change Election-Day to a Sunday. It should be easier for some people to get to the polls on a Sunday, rather than a Tuesday, when most people work.

8) Eliminate voter-registration, or allow same-day registration.

9) Allow prisoners and ex-cons to vote.

10) Relax rules on absentee voting.

None of these ideas is really new, but I think they're worth repeating.

12-point type used to aid the visually impaired.

Anonymous
10 years ago
..i live in ohio and worked for a pac during the last election,BUT so many people believe everything they are told and therefore they believe that the voting process as it is is right and fair...we can write, we can scream, we can rally in the streets, but in all truth, it would take alot for the voting system as we know it to be changed...why?..because those in power have the control...
Link
10 years ago
This one may already have been posted, but as elections draw near again it is something I thought everyone should see.

Please view this
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/peterking.mov
The legal battle
10 years ago
GOP Paying Legal Bills of Bush Official

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer Thu Aug 11, 3:08 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Despite a zero-tolerance policy on tampering with voters, the Republican Party has quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to provide private defense lawyers for a former Bush campaign official charged with conspiring to keep Democrats from voting in New Hampshire.

James Tobin, the president's 2004 campaign chairman for New England, is charged in New Hampshire federal court with four felonies accusing him of conspiring with a state GOP official and a GOP consultant in Virginia to jam Democratic and labor union get-out-the-vote phone banks in November 2002.

A telephone firm was paid to make repeated hang-up phone calls to overwhelm the phone banks in New Hampshire and prevent them from getting Democratic voters to the polls on Election Day 2002, prosecutors allege. Republican John Sununu won a close race that day to be New Hampshire's newest senator.

At the time, Tobin was the RNC's New England regional director, before moving to President Bush's 2004 re-election campaign.

A top New Hampshire Party official and a GOP consultant already have pleaded guilty and cooperated with prosecutors. Tobin's indictment accuses him of specifically calling the GOP consultant to get a telephone firm to help in the scheme.

"The object of the conspiracy was to deprive inhabitants of New Hampshire and more particularly qualified voters ... of their federally secured right to vote," states the latest indictment issued by a federal grand jury on May 18.
*************************************************
the rest is here
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050811/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_voter_suppression


Anonymous
Voting ...
10 years ago
Even my own Congressman in my district admitted that voting irregularities were a big concern legally where electronic voting machines are concerned ... that's from the horses mouth ... unless you're any other Republican. In that case, I just made that up of course ... 
Use It or Lose It: For Democracy, the Time to Act is Now!
10 years ago
By Joan Krawitz, Executive Director of VoteTrustUSA    October 06, 2005 When the Final Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform was released in September, editorials across the nation and blogs around the web condemned its recommendations for a National Voter ID.  Generally overlooked were the Commission’s recommendation of a meaningless and expensive placebo paper record whose status would be left up to the individual states, and the very real risk that opponents of secure and accurate vote counts would attach this cosmetic VVPR requirement to the Commission’s Voter ID recommendations. Well, it's happened exactly as we feared. Rep. Tom Feeney of Florida has introduced a bill that combines the worst of the Carter-Baker recommendations for Voter ID and meaningless VVPR.  The Orwellian title of HR 3910 is Verifying the Outcome of Tomorrow's Elections Act of 2005 (VOTE for short).  Its paper record requirement lets the States decide what significance the paper has – if any.  The Voter ID section requires a government-issued photo ID to vote in person, or a copy of it to vote by mail, per Homeland Security (read REAL ID) guidelines. HR3910 could have the effect of disenfranchising millions of elderly, poor, minority and disabled voters, who lack the time, means, or physical ability to make the long trek to wait in long lines at the Department of Motor Vehicles to obtain the only type of ID that will qualify them to vote.  At the same time, by conflating the questions of Voter ID and VVPRs, it would stifle the debate about the need for verification of the vote totals from electronic voting systems.   The only solution is a two-pronged strategy that goes on the offensive against the insupportable Feeney Bill, while urging Congress to immediately pass Rep. Rush Holt’s Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act of 2005 (HR 550) as written. HR 550 will ensure that the voter verified paper ballot is legally considered the official record in the event of a recount, challenge or discrepancy, and that independent audits of the voter verified paper ballots are performed to check the accuracy of the vote count. HR 550 already has the bipartisan sponsorship of 157 Members of the House of Representatives. There is nothing more important for any of us to do today than to write your Representative demanding that the Holt bill be immediately passed as written, and that the Feeney Bill be stopped in its tracks.   Please Click here NOW to send an email to make sure your voice is heard.  At the same time, your name will be added to a petition, urging the passage of HR 550 as written, which will be delivered to the members of the House Administration Committee, who are responsible for both of these bills.  Without so much as a means to send an email to the Committee’s office, the Committee traditionally operates with little, if any, citizen input.  It’s time to put a stop to that! It’s up to us to make our voices heard by signing the Congressional E-Mail/ Petition, calling your Representative and the Members of the Administration Committee, and asking everyone you know to do the same.    Democracy demands it of us.  We can do no less. ---------------- ...also...see a copy of the full page ad (pdf) in the NY Times 10/7.
Anonymous
10 years ago
I sent an email to my representative, Terry. Just this morning, I got an email from The Pen informing me:

"Our California participants used the system we created specifically for them to send messages to their individual members of the CA legislature and the governor to help get SB 370 PASSED AND SIGNED, a pioneering voter verified paper audit trail bill that can now serve as the model for the rest of the country."

For commentary and analysis on SB 370, see this article on VerifiedVoting.org.
sorry, this is long...but really GOOD, so.........
9 years ago
Invisible Ballots, Confirming Our Worst Fears About Democracy in Decline by Anthony Wade http://www.opednews.com October 8, 2005 No matter how honest and forthright you or I may be, history has proven one inescapable truth about the human condition. Given motive and opportunity, many people will choose to take whatever short cut is available, to achieve their objectives. Translation, they will cheat. One of the hallmarks of our democracy has always been free and fair elections. That hallmark is in grave danger as we enter into a cyberspace method of voting. The documentary, “Invisible Ballots”, investigates this growing crisis. The history of these changes to our voting systems was birthed during the “pregnant chad” debacle following the 2000 presidential election. Images of people holding up punch cards to the light to interpret the intent of the voter frightened the electorate and the push toward computerized ballots was on. Invisible Ballots correctly points out however that Florida was an aberration, not a microcosm of our voting system. Nonetheless, soon an unholy alliance was born between voting machine companies and governmental officials, where ridiculously expensive voting machines were now being mandated in the country through the Help America Vote Act, which unfortunately does very little to actually protect America’s votes. Thus, in just five years, we have gone from being unable to divine our votes, to being unable to trust them. The people interviewed in the documentary are not partisan operatives, nor unreliable alarmists. They are real people, experts, PhDs, and computer programmers, who have lived these problems for years now, trying desperately to get the word out. They weave a compelling story about vote fraud and the vulnerability of our current systems. Essentially there are two problems that can occur in any election. The first is error, as people are inherently human, and prone to mistakes. The second problem is fraud and as history has shown, it is a realistic concern. To not admit these two problems can and do exist in every election is simply inane. Once you establish these two simple truths, the question becomes what can we do to reduce these threats and check to ensure they have not occurred. The core of the problem with computerized voting is that you will never know if either of these has ever occurred. The reason why is that the ballot, the record of who you voted for, is now invisible. It is stored electronically in cyberspace where it can be changed, manipulated, or simply never even be registered. The documentary talks with computer experts who detail very simple ways of introducing malicious code into the source code, designed to change the results. The source code for these companies is not made public by claiming it is “proprietary information.” Nonsense. If you want to deal with the government and receive contracts, you should be mandated to have your source code exposed for inspection to ensure the validity of any election. Invisible Ballots discusses the many security flaws discovered already in the machines, the cost-prohibitive nature of the machines, and the unsavory criminal records of many of the top players in the computer voting machine realm. Would you want someone with felony convictions for fraud designing and selling voting machines to your state? Well, it already is happening. Do you want voting machines that accidentally lose 16,000 votes? Well, Diebold has now admitted that is exactly what happened to Al Gore in Florida in the 2000 election. Those 16,000 votes would mean this country would never have seen the Bush administration. There are plenty of other horrifying stories such as the Georgia debacle when as soon as the state went to computerized voting; a republican Governor was elected for the first time since the Civil War. These stories all point back to one main point. There is no way of auditing an election where the ballots are invisible. Without a fair recount, there is no trust in that election. Without trust, the elections are not fair and free. Once that occurs the democracy hinges upon a tenuous thread between decline and demise. Stalin once said that the person who votes is not nearly as important as the person who counts the votes. In America, we must ensure that the counting is free and fair to protect democracy. The solutions are not that difficult. Every time a person votes a paper copy needs to be generated that the voter than visually verifies as his or her intent and submits to the election officials. Those paper copies are then held in the event of a recount or anomaly. The documentary then correctly points out that mandatory random recounts then need to be done each year to check the efficacy of the machines. I also believe that mandatory recounts for national elections should be implemented. Does this mean it may take a little longer to know the results? Possibly, but at least you could trust the results. Yet no matter how logical and common sense this sounds, there are political operatives working against it to ensure that your ballot remains invisible. These same politicians are either against the concept of free and fair elections or are seriously misguided. I am sure if you investigate you will discover that the companies in question have donated significantly to the politicians who are against paper trails. It is unconscionable that in this country that professes to spread democracy, that ANY politician would work to undermine democracy here at home. If someone does not want a paper trail, it has to make one wonder why? If a company does not want to reveal their source code, it has to make one wonder, what are they hiding? These are completely reasonable questions straight from the heart of democracy.
cont..............
9 years ago
The only point I felt Invisible Ballots should have addressed is the confirmation for the need for exit polling. All of the problems the documentary outlined verify the need for reliable exit polling. The fact is that we use exit polling to see if there was chicanery in foreign elections and it has been successfully used in this country for decades until the Bush administration and the advent of paperless computer voting. Thus if we had a verifiable paper copy of every vote, then we can use exit polling to see where results do not match the projected outcomes and an audit can ensue. If that recount results in a confirmation of the machine count then no one can ever challenge the legitimacy of that election. That is democracy in action. According to the official 2004 election results, George W. Bush received 11 million more votes than he did in 2000. To me, that is statistically impossible for a man who was not over a 50% approval rating going into the election. In Florida, Bush received over 175,000 votes from heavily democratic south Florida, clinching the state for him, another statistical improbability. In Ohio, exit polling was reversed with the final tallies, clinching the country for Bush. Every time a mistake is admitted by the machine companies, the caveat is it would not have changed the final results, but how do we really know? How do we know that was the only “glitch?” How can we be sure that the results would not be different? The answer is, we can’t with invisible ballots. The confidence in our system is in serious jeopardy. I wish I could trust the election results from 2004 but when you consider that 80% of the machine counted ballots in this country are run by two companies, run by two brothers who are beholden to Bush, the integrity of the results must be challenged. Then when you see the GOP counter any attempts at simply having a paper trail, the companies refuse to release their source code, and partisan Secretaries of State also acting as the chairmen of the campaign of one of the candidates, you have to wonder why people WANT these ballots to be invisible. It is a cancer eating away at our democracy in decline. I have heard plenty of people on the right say that this is sour grapes or the complaints are designed to undermine the credibility of the president. To them I simply say, “Support VISIBLE ballots” and they will never hear another complaint. To not support a verifiable paper trail is to not support democracy. If they wish to believe that George Bush received 11 million more votes than in 2000 just because of the “get the vote out” efforts of the GOP, then put your money where your mouth is and open the source code, demand paper trails, and let democracy once again be on the march. If you are being honest and forthright, then you should have nothing to hide. --------------- Anthony Wade, a contributing writer to opednews.com, is dedicated to educating the populace to the lies and abuses of the government. He is a 37-year-old independent writer from New York with political commentary articles seen on multiple websites. A Christian progressive and professional Rehabilitation Counselor working with the poor and disabled, Mr. Wade believes that you can have faith and hold elected officials accountable for lies and excess. Anthony Wade’s Archive: http://www.opednews.com/archiveswadeanthony.htm Email Anthony: takebacktheus@yahoo.com http://invisibleballots.com/ http://coalition4visibleballots.homestead.com/ **emphasis above is my own. I'd have underlined the whole thing because I couldn't agree more with all of it..but my guess is most of you do too. Check out the links. It's great that there are many states that are working for verified voting, and about half of the states have already passed legislation. Not surprisingly, mine (and baby bro Jeb's)has not.. but every month or so I bug my state legislature about it. So far I've never even got a bs form letter back. My senator and rep have cosponsored legislation at the federal level, but they've been sitting in committee since February. Not many people want to think about elections until they get close..but 2006 is not that far away. Keep the pressure on. I truly can't understand why EVERYONE regardless of party isn't terribly outraged by this.
Maybe this oughta go on
9 years ago

ROD's Drive-in, but I'll start here first.  Bradblog has the video of Catherine Crier on CourtTV, regarding US elections.  See http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3041 , and just scroll down a bit.

>Catherine Crier offered a devasting editorial recently on Court TV in regard to election integrity. Her piece was spurred by RFK's Jr.'s Rolling Stone exposĂ© on the theft of the '04 Presidential Election, but covers a panoply of current threats to our electoral system — described as "a full frontal attack on Democracy" — including guys like Ohio's J. Kenneth Blackwell, convicted RNC/White House phone-jammer James Tobin and the Electronic Voting Machine Menace of Diebold and other private companies who have usurped our public election system. <snip>

A little to read, a lot to see.

Anonymous
9 years ago
It's heartening to see a tiny ray of mainstream media coverage of the electile dysfunction in our system. Keith Olbermann also used to cover it. He used to be the only TV personality who did, to my knowledge. Unfortunately, many people don't think anything is real unless it's constructed as the official, collective reality on TV. Right after the 2004 election, I read that 20% of the American people believed that the election was stolen. I wonder if that percentage has gone up since then, as the truth has slowly trickled into the mainstream collective consciousness.
9 years ago

is there ANY MEMBER OF our CONGRE$$ sponsoring legislation to correct the voting irregularities?

Anonymous
9 years ago
There has been legislation sponsored, but it has made things worse. You know, kind of like campaign finance reform. Something was supposedly done, so we can relax. Only nothing has really improved, for all practical intents and purposes. Now it's harder to address campaign finance reform, because supposedly, it's already been addressed. The legislation to help America vote has been kind of like that. Imagine that. I believe that local groups of people have improved things at the local level, but I don't think we can expect anything good at the national level. If you don't trust the voting machines in your local area, get involved locally. That's where people seem to be able to change things the most effectively.
9 years ago

John Kerry decided not to fight Ohio, so we should forget about that. We must think about ways to ensure that future elections are fair.

The move to establish a paper trail is now a struggle at the state level. Fortunately, most of the states have accepted this demand.

9 years ago
We should only forget about Ohio if we are sure that no cheating happened there.  Personally, from what I've read, I can't be sure of that.  If they've broken the law, put them on trial.
DO NOT FORGET ABOUT OHIO!!
9 years ago
that is a very dangerous mistake. ohio has too many electoral votes. the vote was fixed in 2004...i know...i personally witnessed the fraud.

already, blackwell is already on the rampage to steal another election. he has proposed new laws that will make it virtually impossible for any organization to do mass voter registrations and the voting in the state of ohio decided to uphold these unconstitutional rules.

also, blackwell is telling every precinct to turn in their programmable cards, the ones that run the voting machines, with their pass codes to a central office in columbus. why would anyone put all of the voting pass codes in one place?

also, the company that programs the voting machines is diebold, and they have been proven to have purposefully left out the security codes that would make it impossible to hack into the voting results. so why is this state still using diebold?

also, diebold says it's impossible to make a voting machine with a paper trail. or rather, it is much more difficult. however, diebold is the company that oversees and programs all of those atm machines that are located around the world, and what spits out of the atm when you finish your transaction? isn't it a paper receipt? oh my...

programming is extremely easy. it is very easy to put several lines of code into a 10,000 line program that can easily change the votes.
9 years ago
Exactly, Catherine!
8 years ago
Just in case there is STILL anyone sleepwalking since the last election............. Princeton Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine "This paper presents a fully independent security study of a Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine, including its hardware and software. We obtained the machine from a private party. Analysis of the machine, in light of real election procedures, shows that it is vulnerable to extremely serious attacks. For example, an attacker who gets physical access to a machine or its removable memory card for as little as one minute could install malicious code; malicious code on a machine could steal votes undetectably, modifying all records, logs, and counters to be consistent with the fraudulent vote count it creates. An attacker could also create malicious code that spreads automatically and silently from machine to machine during normal election activities — a voting-machine virus. We have constructed working demonstrations of these attacks in our lab. Mitigating these threats will require changes to the voting machine's hardware and software and the adoption of more rigorous election procedures."
8 years ago

Thanks, Terri for the wake-up call!

Hey folks, we DO need to be vigilant. Are these voting machines in use where you vote? Are YOU poll-watching? Will your vote count, or will we have another election stolen?

From the same report (My Italics):


"Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine:
Executive Summary
Ariel J. Feldman, J. Alex Halderman, and Edward W. Felten
For more information and the full text of this study, see http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting.

The Diebold AccuVote-TS and its newer relative the AccuVote-TSx are together the most widely deployed electronic voting platform in the United States. In the November 2006 general election, these machines are scheduled to be used in 357 counties representing nearly 10% of registered voters. Approximately half these counties — including all of Maryland and Georgia — will employ the AccuVote-TS model. More than 33,000 of the TS machines are in service nationwide.

This paper reports on our study of an AccuVote-TS, which we obtained from a private party. We analyzed the machine's hardware and software, performed experiments on it, and considered whether real election practices would leave it suitably secure. We found that the machine is vulnerable to a number of extremely serious attacks that undermine the accuracy and credibility of the vote counts it produces.

Computer scientists have generally been skeptical of voting systems of this type, Direct Recording Electronic (DRE), which are essentially general-purpose computers running specialized election software. Experience with computer systems of all kinds shows that it is exceedingly difficult to ensure the reliability and security of complex software or to detect and diagnose problems when they do occur. Yet DREs rely fundamentally on the correct and secure operation of complex software programs. Simply put, many computer scientists doubt that paperless DREs can be made reliable and secure, and they expect that any failures of such systems would likely go undetected.

Previous security studies of DREs affirm this skepticism, but to our knowledge ours is the first public study encompassing the hardware and software of a widely used DRE. The famous paper by Kohno, Stubblefield, Rubin, and Wallach studied a leaked version of the source code for parts of the Diebold AccuVote-TS software and found many design errors and vulnerabilities, which are generally confirmed by our study. Our study extends theirs by including the machine's hardware and operational details, by finding and describing several new and serious vulnerabilities, and by building working demonstrations of several security attacks.

Main Findings The main findings of our study are:

  1. Malicious software running on a single voting machine can steal votes with little if any risk of detection. The malicious software can modify all of the records, audit logs, and counters kept by the voting machine, so that even careful forensic examination of these records will find nothing amiss. We have constructed demonstration software that carries out this vote-stealing attack.

  2. Anyone who has physical access to a voting machine, or to a memory card that will later be inserted into a machine, can install said malicious software using a simple method that takes as little as one minute. In practice, poll workers and others often have unsupervised access to the machines.

  3. AccuVote-TS machines are susceptible to voting-machine viruses — computer viruses that can spread malicious software automatically and invisibly from machine to machine during normal pre- and post-election activity. We have constructed a demonstration virus that spreads in this way, installing our demonstration vote-stealing program on every machine it infects.

  4. While some of these problems can be eliminated by improving Diebold's software, others cannot be remedied without replacing the machines' hardware. Changes to election procedures would also be required to ensure security."

8 years ago
New Diebold Feature Just Discovered -If you reboot the Diebold touchscreen, the memory pack loses the votes. These same problems in Maryland appear to have happened in Gaston County NC. Read Avi Rubin's report on the failure of Diebold memory packs to upload votes in Maryland's recent primary: http://avi-rubin.blogspot.com/2006/10/following-is-exce... Here is a synopsis of what an election judge reported to Avi: Republican Chief Judge in the September 12 primary in Montgomery County, Maryland reports: One of the eight touch screen voting machines used on election day recorded no votes, even though 55 voters were logged onto the machine. The problem as explained by Diebold and the county BoE: That particular touch screen machine had been rebooted, and the memory card had been removed and reinserted into the machine. The election judge was told that this was a "security" feature! The Board of Elections, with the help of Diebold was able to recover the “missing” votes from the hard drive. Gaston County North Carolina used the Diebold TS from 1998 to 2004 with serious problems reported. (I don't have data for 2000) In both elections Gaston also had problems with the memory packs not recording the votes, and the central tabulator. The DESI technicians had to "manually" retrieve the votes. The central tabulators lacked the capacity or ability to receive vote totals. In November 2004, in Gaston County NC, (a Diebold TS county) half of the precincts in Gaston County did not balance. State to probe Gaston election 19 November 2004 The Observer reported Thursday that the numbers did not balance in more than half the precincts in Gaston County. Gaston elections officials said they had been unaware of the problem. http://www.votersunite.org/article.asp?id=3915 Legal Documents Regarding the 2004 Diebold Problems Correspondence between the NC State Board of Elections General Counsel and DESI's attorney reveal many serious problems with the Diebold machines in the 2004 election Two malfunctions of particular note: 15 Memory packs that didn't work, affecting 11,945 votes There was a problem with 11,945 votes from Dallas, NC. Seven days after the election the County Board of Elections noticed that 11,945 voter were missing (the precinct rolls reported 12,867 where the GEMS system only showed 922). Apparently, 15 early voting memory packs didn't work in the standard (AccuVote-T process of accumulating the memory packs onto one unit and then "downloading" them into the GEMS server. That didn't work in a reproducible fashion. These memory packs had to be directly loaded onto the GEMS server by a DESI technician. This seems to have been done in a controlled manner. Hand entering of ballots: finally, the document describes hand-entering of "three to five" ballots. Here is the legal correspondence http://www.josephhall.org/nqb2/media/GastonDiebold2004.... The full article describing the 2004 Gaston County Diebold meltdown here http://josephhall.org/nqb2/index.php/2005/10/03/p691 1998 "Bugs" in Diebold TS in Gaston County Voting Machines and Central Tabulators - I turned up similar problems with the memory packs and the central tabulator capacity issue in the Diebold TS in Gaston County - dating back to 1998: "In 1998, Gaston County was using direct-record electronic voting machines for the first time. Before the election, officials discovered some problems with the machines, and an upgrade was necessary. The machines were run through basic testing, but the upgrades cut into time for additional testing for known “bugs.” Suddenly it was election night. The first sign of a bug appeared when the time came to report the totals. Nearly one-third of Gaston County’s precincts reported no votes because the cartridges that read the totals from the machines were not functioning. Another facet of this bug was evident for the county at large: when the vote totals reached 32,000, the tabulators would not tally any higher. The chair of the county board of elections opened the process up to all who wished to observe, as the computer experts opened the machines and retrieved the source code that showed the proper vote totals. The internal drives that showed how each voter had voted were intact and retrievable. Two statewide court of appeals races, one state House of Representatives race, and one local race were close enough that they were determined by the data retrieved from the machines. Because of the safeguard of public scrutiny, confidence in the way the matter was handled was high, and there were no election protests." (page 8) http://ncinfo.iog.unc.edu/pubs/electronicversions/pg/pg... How many times were voting machines re-booted in Maryland in the primary, and what is to prevent that from being done on purpose?
Anonymous
Voting Expert: Widespread Election Fraud Again
8 years ago
http://tinyurl.com/ykeqjw

Voting Expert: Widespread Election Fraud Again

Harris tells Alex Jones Show she has acquired software for big three companies, stories of mass voter intimidation, arrests, machine meltdowns proliferate

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, November 7, 2006

Vote fraud crusader and rights activist Bev Harris has told the nationally syndicated Alex Jones Show that she is in possession of voting software used by the big three voting systems companies and is now in a position to completely expose the true scale of electronic vote fraud, as a cascade of stories about voter intimidation, arrests and machine meltdowns arrived on election day.

"They aren't even being sneaky about it now," said Harris in summarizing the widespread voting machine failures and election fraud that unfolded throughout the day, referring to policies whereby voting precincts have imposed complete blackouts on any indication of their results until the official confirmation from headquarters is given.

Precinct reports are now being treated as illegal and individuals are being charged for even suggesting that precincts keep tally counts of votes so comparison checks can be conducted later.

Harris also related stories of arrests of those merely trying to ensure checks and balances are taking place as voting machines fail nationwide, including an entire county blackout in Indiana.

Harris also discussed dirty tricks in Los Angeles, whereby polling precincts remain closed anything to an hour after they were supposed to open and election workers are putting green lines through ballot papers to denote the location of voting, knowing full well that this invalidates the paper during the subsequent optical scan. Pollsters were caught telling colleagues in hushed tones not to let voters know about this scam.

Widespread reports of scanning machines rejecting ballots are also flooding in, with voters told to "go home" if their ballot is rejected three times by the machine.

Harris featured in the recent blockbuster HBO documentary Hacking Democracy and said that since appearing in the program she has received death threats warning "we are going to get you," and "I hope you die a horrible awful slow death."

She has also been the target of anonymous Internet bloggers who slander voting activists. In one instance further research uncovered the fact that one of these "agent provocateurs" was a Diebold employee.

But Harris remains undeterred and is now in a position to expose the length and breadth of the fraud after acquiring the software programs for the other big three voting systems companies aside from Diebold.

Harris exclusively told the Alex Jones Show, "I have now got a hold of the software of the other three major vendors and won't be releasing it," stating she was in possession of the code used by Election Systems & Software, Sequoia and Hart Intercivics.

"We're going to be able to compare what they give us with very specific information - dates, times, and serial numbers of the machines," said Harris.
Anonymous
Election Could Have Been Thrown, Says Fraud Expert
8 years ago
http://tinyurl.com/yg99hs

Election Could Have Been Thrown, Says Fraud Expert

Harris considers token victory for Democrats fixed to quell dissent on mass voting fraud, liberal bloggers begin to attack anyone who doesn't jump on the Pelosi bandwagon

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Thursday, November 9, 2006

Voting rights activist Bev Harris fears the mid-term elections may have been thrown in order to quell suspicions about vote fraud in anticipation of a major 2008 coup. Liberal blog sites are already naively telling whistleblowers and "conspiracy theorists" to keep quiet now that the left arm of the establishment, the Democrats, have re-emerged.

"I think it's gonna be interesting to see which election reform groups decide that it's not such a bad problem after all now that they have Democrats in there because I think that some of them are actually closet partisans," Harris told the Alex Jones Show.

"The issue here is not change in the last 24 hours - voting machines can't be authenticated, they're not necessarily accurate, they're tamper friendly - nothing has changed about that in 24 hours."

"We shouldn't really try to say well some Democrats are in there so now it's OK - it's not."

However, that's exactly what a lot of left-leaning establishment types are parroting, claiming a Democrat victory proves "American democracy still works," and that questions about electronic voting machines should be tossed aside.

Glenn Greenwald, an attorney and highly regarded liberal blogger, today went on the attack against those who many in the establishment left had previously allied with in order to take on the Neo-Cons.

"Chronic defeatists and conspiracy theorists — well-intentioned though they may be — need to re-evaluate their defeatism and conspiracy theories in light of this rather compelling evidence which undermines them," states Greenwald, "Republicans don't possess the power to dictate the outcome of elections with secret Diebold software. They can't magically produce Osama bin Laden the day before the election."

Greenwald's naivety is rivaled only by his arrogance and we are already beginning to have flashbacks to the Bill Clinton era, when liberals associated their authority with the Democrats and defended their every action without recourse.

Greenwald seems to have had a memory bypass that prevents him recalling anything from over two years ago. The fact is that the Republicans did produce Osama bin Laden before the 2004 election and Republicans have been caught engaging on vote fraud across the board, including via Diebold systems. Diebold's own Chief Executive, Walden O'Dell, committed himself to "helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president," before the 2004 election.

Ludicrously, Greenwald claims that six years of repeated Bush administration assaults on the Constitution, imperial jaunts that have killed and maimed hundreds of thousands of innocents, the degradation of how America is viewed abroad, and the very integrity of the country, has all been reversed by the empowerment of a party rhetorically led by Nancy Pelosi, a pro-torture, pro-war, mobbed-up establishment sycophant who has already agreed to protect Bush and his cronies from criminal investigations.

"All of the hurdles and problems that are unquestionably present and serious — a dysfunctional and corrupt national media, apathy on the part of Americans, the potent use of propaganda by the Bush administration, voter suppression and election fraud tactics, gerrymandering and fundraising games — can all be overcome. They just were," smarts Greenwald.

Harris encouraged people to take a look at which Democrats got voted in and what their stance was on the issues that were supposedly the root of voter discontent in the first place.

"I keep seeing reports on how these are the people who everyone can get along with, so what does that mean?"

Harris is absolutely right in identifying the fact that yesterday's charade was nothing more than re-arranging deck chairs, and this is proven again by the fact that likely speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has already vowed to protect Bush from criminal impeachment and the two have agreed to work together on advancing common cause agendas, such as the mass amnesty of illegal aliens that Bush couldn't get through under a Republican controlled House, an issue even Rush Limbaugh is now screaming bloody murder about.

Harris called for the temporary bias of favoritism for either the Republicans or the Democrats to be set aside in favor of the pursuit of trustworthy voting systems and the integrity of the electoral process in the long-term. Indicating that she had received more substantive complaints about vote fraud than in any other election, Harris said the possibility remained strong that this election had been thrown in order to re-invest artificial trust in electronic voting machines and stop the momentum of voting rights activists.

"Supposing I was really wanting to make sure that I could control elections through voting machines," said Harris, "I would probably throw a fight now and then because right now we have so much momentum going to get real change and then if you make it look like 'well there's nothing to look at here, move along,' then we won't get it fixed by 2008."

Will liberals continue to frolic around totally oblivious to the fact that the battle has just begun, or will they finally wake up and realize that it takes more than the re-election of Team B to stop the juggernaut of tyranny driven by both parties that has steamrollered America since t
Anonymous
Video the Vote
8 years ago
View election day videos on Video the Vote:

http://videothevote.org/

Video the Vote is a website where people can upload video footage that they have taken on election day. The aim is to stop voter suppression by observing the vote and sharing the results.
Anonymous
The Pentagon Papers of E-Voting
8 years ago
'The Pentagon Papers Of E-Voting'
Tuesday, 7 November 2006, 2:34 pm
Article: Bradblog.Com

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3731

Previously Unreleased 200-Page Report Said to Document Some 180 Security Flaws and Recommendations Made to Diebold and the State
Still Unclear as to Who Made Changes, Additions, Redactions to Publicly Released 40-Page Version of Report…

On Friday night, we broke Rebecca Abrahams's exclusive story concerning the long-sought yet never-released complete "Risk Assessment Report" of Diebold's electronic voting systems as commissioned by the state of Maryland from the Scientific Applications International Corporation (SAIC) in 2003.

Tonight, The BRAD BLOG is releasing that report exclusively in full as given to us by Abrahams, who says she obtained it from a source described to us as "a patriotic high-level state official." She says the source is "someone very close to this situation" in the Maryland government.

The original, never-before-released SAIC report was nearly 200 pages in all, and details a number of extraordinary security vulnerabilities found in Diebold's AccuVote-TS (touch-screen) voting systems as deployed by the state of Maryland initially in 2002. The version of the SAIC report that was eventually released to the public, after extreme redaction, was a mere 38 pages long.

It was reported by Abrahams that neither the full MD State Board of Elections, nor even the Governor himself, was ever allowed to see the full report.

Regarded by many in the computer science, security, and election integrity community as "The Pentagon Papers of E-Voting," the report as released by MD's State Election Administrator, Linda Lamone, was edited, changed, and, of course, highly redacted by someone.

To this date, it remains unclear whether or not Diebold itself was responsible for the changes, edits, and redactions, but according to several computer scientists and security experts with whom we discussed the matter today, the company currently seems to be the leading candidate responsible for changing and removing information from the independently commissioned SAIC report. Those with whom we spoke questioned the propriety of Diebold having such final control over an independent report concerning its own systems. Systems, we might add, that will be used across the state and indeed across the entire country this November 7th, despite the information withheld from the public in this 2003 report.

Also unclear — since the state and virtually the entire computer science and security community have been unable to review the complete, original report until now — is whether or not any of the various 180 or so recommendations for changes contained in the report have ever been addressed and corrected by either Diebold or the state of Maryland.

Myriad independent reports on Diebold systems have shown, over the last several months and years since the SAIC report was completed, that scores of serious security vulnerabilities still remain on Diebold's voting systems — including their paper-based optical-scan voting machines, touch-screen voting machines, and even their central tabulator software.

Reports of these serious vulnerabilities have now been documented by Finnish computer scientist Harri Hursti, the computer security firm Security Innovation, and BlackBoxVoting.org in both Leon County, FL and then in Emery County, UT; by a team of scientists at UC Berkeley commissioned by the CA Sec. of State; by Princeton University; and even by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Computer Emergency Readiness Team (as The BRAD BLOG originally reported in September of 2005 after a tip from a Diebold insider).

Whether or not the vulnerabilities revealed in those subsequent studies — made mostly over the last year or so, but some, such as the Dept. of Homeland Security's CERT alert came even prior to the 2004 Presidential Election — were discovered previously in the full 2003 SAIC report has been widely questioned until now.

If, in fact, such vulnerabilities were indeed found in 2003 by SAIC but subsequently kept covered up by Diebold or their allies within the MD State Elections division, such as longtime booster Lamone, the question of accountability — and even the specter of malicious out-and-out fraud — has been raised.

During an interview with Abrahams and Stephen Spoonamore, the CEO of computer security firm Cybrinth Inc., on a radio program we co-hosted yesterday, they suggested that an FBI investigation may currently be under way in Maryland concerning several events surrounding the use of Diebold machines in the state.

We've not yet had time to review the entire unredacted report as posted below. However, given the importance of this never-before-released information — and after close consultation with Abrahams and several others — The BRAD BLOG feels the national public interest in the information contained in this report requires full and immediate release and disclosure.

The report, therefore, is released here for the first time…

Continued...

Anonymous
8 years ago
Please note that the version of the report released here has several additional cover pages describing the report as "State of Maryland - Electronic Voting System Security: Department of Budget and Management, Annapolis, Maryland, September 17, 2003."

Nonetheless, the header on each page describes the document with a SAIC tracking number, with a date of September 2, 2003, and contains the title "Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting System and Processes Risk Assessment." The publicly released redacted version (also linked below for comparison) has the same date and tracking number. The title for that version is the same, but with "Redacted Final" added to the header.

As well, this version contains many unexplained strike-throughs, additions, and rewrites. As Abrahams detailed in her Friday exclusive, some of those edits were included in the final redacted release version of the report, while other sections were simply removed entirely. It is unclear as to who made the suggested edits and additions seen in the version of the report we are making available here.

Note also that there are several handwritten comments and marginalia which were apparently made by Abrahams and others during their review of the document and comparisons with the publicly released redacted version.

We discussed the issues of both the dates and the various edits with Spoonamore this afternoon. He told us that he previously reviewed this document "in great detail" in conjuction with Abrahams's initial report.

As to its authenticity, since we are unable to get comment from the state of Maryland, SAIC, or Diebold at this time, Spoonamore told us, "The report is certainly a Diebold risk assessment for the state of Maryland." He says that he "would give a 99% assessment that this document is the real thing."

Spoonamore adds that the SAIC tracking number is an "authentic tracking number for the state of Maryland and matches the sequence for mid-2003 assignment by SAIC."

With regard to the content of the report, Spoonamore, a Republican of 22 years, explained in our conversation late this afternoon, "There is no one on that public commission [in Maryland] that has the skills to use that document." After his review of the report, he says that "the real value in this document is what it's not saying. It's clear that even SAIC was not allowed to review the source code or the computer interfaces" for the complete Diebold AccuVote-TS voting system.

Nonetheless, he says that the report clearly reveals that the security in place in these systems is wholly inadequate for the threats faced when used during an election. That danger is one described this week to the LA Times as "a matter of national security," by computer scientist David Jefferson of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. He added, "The legitimacy of government depends on getting elections right."

Jefferson served on the UC Berkeley panel convened by California Sec. of State Bruce McPherson to study several aspects of the Diebold voting system. That panel found more than 16 "serious vulnerabilities" in the system last February before McPherson certified the systems for use in California anyway. Jefferson continues to serve as one of the top technical voting systems advisors to McPherson.

"Microsoft has admitted that the Windows operating system in use in Maryland's Diebold voting systems is subject to at least 75,000 known exploits," Spoonamore told us. "The unredacted version [of the SAIC report] reveals that none of them have been defended against in these Diebold machines."

Finally, as Abrahams reported last Friday, there is yet another report commissioned by the State of Maryland to examine whether the items in the SAIC report were adequately addressed. That report, completed by the firm Freeman, Craft and McGregor — a group which has come under fire from Election Integrity advocates for its close relationship with the voting machine companies such as Diebold — has also never been released to the public. We are told that we may soon be able to release that report in full as well. Stay tuned.

The complete SAIC Report documents follow in full below. The 200 or so pages have been converted into five separate PDF files for easier downloading…

Section One
http://tinyurl.com/y4q4uf

Section Two
http://tinyurl.com/y7emzz

Section Three
http://tinyurl.com/y97yak

Section Four
http://tinyurl.com/y4zs6n

Section Five
http://tinyurl.com/y77crq

Anonymous
VotersUnite! Problem Log for 2006 Election
8 years ago
http://tinyurl.com/yab2ox

What, Exactly, IS an Election Meltdown?
By VotersUnite.org
November 09, 2006

The saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." But what if it IS broke, and those who could fix it say that it ain't?

Paul DeGregorio, chairman of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission; Doug Lewis of the Election Center; Doug Chapin of electionline.org; Dan Tokaji, Ohio State law professor; California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson and other secretaries of state tell us that the feared "meltdown" just didn't happen on November 7, 2006.

They agree that the election went "better than expected," "relatively smoothly," with "isolated problems", "just a few glitches," "minor issues," "no major problems."

So, with multi-hundreds of news reports of election problems across the country — a fraction of the problems that actually occurred — you have to wonder what a meltdown would have to look like.

What if malfunctions of untested registration software in a major city — say, Denver — forced tens of thousands of voters to wait in line for hours and thousands to leave without voting? Would the election still be "smooth"?

What if voting machines failed at thousands of polling places in over half the states, and the problems caused such severe delays in eight states that the voting hours were extended? Is that "just a few glitches"?

What if voting machines of every brand switched people's votes or lost their votes in states from Florida to Pennsylvania to Illinois to Texas to Kentucky to South Carolina to Maryland to Georgia to Virginia to ... "No major problems?"

What if dozens of people reported that their votes for one Congressional race disappeared from the touch screen, and the election director refused to take the machines out of service, and the results showed that 13% of the voters (18,000) hadn't registered a vote in that race? And what if the margin of victory was 368 votes, and there was no way to audit the results? A "minor" problem?

What if polling places all across the largest state in the nation, as well as other states, ran out of paper ballots and the voting machines didn't work? Are these "isolated problems"?

What if lots of electronic ballot boxes (memory cards) were missing in a major city, and only 23 had been found after an extensive search, and the election director said she loses them all the time and normally no one pays any attention, but this time four local races hung in the balance? Is this "smooth" to the people whose ballots were lost in Indianapolis?

And then ... what if partisan control of the United States Senate depended on one race in one state, where the reported margin of victory was three-tenths of a percent, and a recount was impossible because there was no way to recover voter intent from the electronic tallies? In what world is this "better than expected"?

In the 2006 general election, voters were given the wrong ballots and told the wrong polling place. They stood in line for hours waiting for equipment to be fixed or more ballots to arrive. They watched their votes disappear on the screen, or flip to another candidate, or even go up in smoke — literally, when an e-voting machine short-circuited.

If the Chairman of the Election Assistance Commission, Secretaries of State, and other influential names in election administration continue calling these dysfunctional election occurrences "normal glitches," when will the system get fixed?

(If you think it "ain't broke," see the VotersUnite.org problem log.)
http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp
Anonymous
8 years ago

http://www.alternet.org/story/44217/

ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINE SLAYS NINE
Terrorizes Florida in Thrill-Kill Rampage

That headline was from a satirical column written by Andy Borowitz published last Monday, the day before Tuesday's midterm elections. Unfortunately, given the post-election coverage by some of the nation's leading media -- or at least their headline writers -- it seems that only an event such as a Diebold voting machine becoming "unmoored from the floor and...trampling everyone and everything in its path," as Borowitz wrote, would qualify as anything more than a "glitch," "hiccup," "snag" or "snafu."

"Voting System Worked, With Some Hiccups," declared the AP headline on Wednesday. "Polling Places Report Snags, but Not Chaos," echoed The New York Times. "Hiccups"? "Snags"? Try telling that to the thousands of voters around the country who were unable to simply cast a vote last Tuesday because new, untested electronic voting machines failed to work. Monumentally. Across the entire country.

"Not Chaos"? Apparently the Times headline writers failed to check with the folks in Denver who were lined up around the block for hours to vote. They didn't even bother to read the Denver Post article headlining the problem as a "Voting Nightmare" during the day on Tuesday and quoting voter Lauren Brockman saying, "We will not get to vote today," after he had shown up before work to vote at 6:45 a.m. at the Botanic Gardens only to wait on line for an hour before giving up.

They didn't check with Bill Ritter, the Colorado gubernatorial candidate, who had to wait almost two hours to vote, or with Sean Kelley, a Denver resident, who said to the Post, "I can't believe I'm in the United States of America," before he gave up and went home without voting after waiting three hours in line when electronic machines broke down. Despite an emergency request, the courts in Colorado refused to allow the city's new consolidated "Election Centers" to remain open for extra hours that night.

Similar problems led to slightly more responsible officials ordering polls to be kept open longer than scheduled in at least eight other states due to voting machine problems. In a Times story published the day before (which apparently the headline writers of the previously mentioned piece failed to read), it was reported that in Illinois "hundreds of precincts were kept open ... because of late openings at polling places related to machine problems" and in Indiana "voting equipment problems led to extensions of at least 30 minutes in three counties."

Other states where polls remained open late due to the inability of legally registered voters to vote when they showed up earlier in the day include Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana and Ohio.

But the list of problems and, yes, meltdowns is still pouring in from around the country. My in-box has been beyond readability since polls opened on Tuesday morning, and my ability to keep up had already been near the breaking point in the weeks prior just from similar reported disasters that occurred with these failing, flipping and flimsy machines during the early voting period in Florida, Arkansas, Missouri, Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, Texas and California, just to name a few.

On Election Day, the Electronic Frontier Foundation had received about 17,000 complaints on its toll-free hot line by 8 p.m. Common Cause received 14,000 calls by 4 p.m. John Gideon at VotersUnite.org performed the herculean task of logging as many news reports as he could in a searchable online database of reported election problems that day.

The nation dodged a significant bullet when George Allen conceded in his Virginia Senate race Thursday. Had he not chosen to do so, America would have found itself smack-dab in the middle of another Florida 2000 crisis with the balance of Congress depending on voting machines that offer absolutely no way to recount ballots to achieve any form of accuracy or clarity in the race. The battle of the forensic computer scientists trying to figure out what happened would have been another long national nightmare.

But that didn't happen, so everything's cool. Right?

Continued...


Anonymous
8 years ago

We dodged another bullet when Sen. Rick Santorum conceded. Earlier in the day, he and the Pennsylvania Republican Party sent a letter to the secretary of the commonwealth demanding that voting machines in 27 counties be impounded after they received reports of touch-screen votes flipping from the Republican candidate to his Democratic opponent.

Imagine, by the way, if Democrats had taken such a responsible position to impound machines every time votes were reported to have flipped from Democrat to Republican -- certainly the more commonly reported occurrence on Tuesday. There wouldn't be a voting machine left in the country. It's a pity the Democrats haven't figured that out. Yet.

They're so delighted to have won anything they haven't stopped to realize they might have taken 40 seats in the House instead of just 30 had they bothered to fight for an accountable, secure, transparent electoral system and instructed their candidates to concede nothing until every vote was counted, verified and audited for accuracy.

And still, the Times and AP headline writers -- who seem to have failed to read the stories they were headlining, given that each outlined a litany of such meltdowns -- believe there's nothing to be concerned about.

18,000 votes seems to have vanished into thin air via ES&S iVotronic touch-screen machines (no paper "trails," much less countable paper ballots ) in Sarasota County, site of Florida's 13th U.S. Congressional District contest between Vern Buchanan and Christine Jennings. There's currently a 368-vote difference between them, but there's no paper to to examine to figure out what may have gone wrong and explain how a 13% undervote rate was found in only in that race.

On the very same ballot above that race, the gubernatorial contest had only a 2.6% undervote rate. A hospital board election below it had only a 1% undervote rate. On absentee ballots for the Jennings/Buchanan race, the undervote rate was just 1.8%. Some of the 120 complaints from touch-screen voters that came into the Herald Tribune on Tuesday are published on the newspaper's site.

18,000 undervotes. In Florida. With no paper ballots to go back and check to see if all of those voters simply chose not to vote in that race for some inexplicable reason. Faith-based voting in a race that Florida election officials in the secretary of state's office have said they have no plans to investigate.

Good thing the balance of the U.S. House doesn't hang on that race. Or a presidential election. But why worry about something like that? After all, a mere 18,000 disappeared votes on an electronic voting machine in a single county in Florida could never affect the outcome of a national presidential race. (Again, for the sarcasm-impaired: Right.)

In San Diego, thousands of hackable Diebold voting machines were sent home for three weeks prior to the election with poll workers (most of them apparently high-school teenagers hired by the county's registrar of voters, Mikel Haas) on "sleepovers." As Princeton University demonstrated, a hotel mini-bar key and just 60 seconds of unsupervised time with a single machine is just about all a single person would need to steal votes from every machine in the county. Nobody would ever be able to prove it. Thus, there is no basis for confidence in any reported results from any election this year in San Diego County. 50th Congressional District candidate Francine Busby has, so far, appropriately refused to concede despite the wide margin being reported in her race from the tainted, effectively decertified voting machines Haas disgracefully used for the first time this year across the entire county.

In Orange County, Calif., voters were turned away without being able to vote at all when machines failed to work and there were not enough paper ballots for voters to cast their votes. Many reportedly opted to vote on Chinese and Vietnamese ballots when English emergency paper ballots had run out (in places where they even had paper ballots to chose from), just so they could exercise their franchise. Many voters were simply told to "come back later," when poll workers hoped the machines would be working again.

Continued...

Anonymous
8 years ago

It is not yet a felony in the United States of America to turn a legally registered voter away from the polls without allowing him to cast a vote. But it damned well should be.

Victoria Wulsin currently trails Jean Schmidt by less than half a percentage point in their Ohio 2nd Congressional District race for the U.S. House. Wulsin has also appropriately refused to concede until every vote is counted, accounted for and verified. But a recount will rely on both the same hackable Diebold AccuVote TSx touch-screen machines used in San Diego and the same ES&S optical scan machines that were found to have mistabulated at least nine Republican primary races in Pottawatomie County, Iowa, last June.

Ten other House races still remain "too close to call." Many of them will rely on "results" reported by inaccurate, unreliable, untested electronic voting machines.

Fortunately, the balance of the House doesn't rest on any of those races either, so all is well.

When Warren Stewart of the nonpartisan VoteTrustUSA.org noted a number of Voting Machine Company apologists -- from the U.S. Elections Assistance Commission's Paul Degregorio to California's unelected secretary of state, Bruce McPherson, to the Election Center's Doug Lewis and ElectionLine.org's Doug Chapin -- joining the "everything's fine" crowd, he noted:

They agree that the election went "better than expected," "relatively smoothly," with "isolated problems," "just a few glitches," "minor issues," "no major problems."

So, with multi-hundreds of news reports of election problems across the country -- a fraction of the problems that actually occurred -- you have to wonder what a meltdown would have to look like.

What would it look like, indeed?

I guess before the voting machine company flunkies and Times and AP headline writers would notice, it would have to look like Borowitz' "Diebold Rampage" scenario. Though even that would likely have a predictable ending...

The touch-screen terror then cut a swath of death and destruction across the state, despite attempts by the state police to apprehend it.

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush appeared on television later in the day to urge calm, telling residents, "Clearly, Florida's electronic voting machines are still very much a work in progress."

At the White House, spokesman Tony Snow did not directly address the issue of the voting machine's deadly rampage, choosing instead to make general remarks about the electoral process.

"This administration remains steadfast in its support of free and fair elections," he said, adding, "in Iraq."

Anonymous
Clear Evidence That the 2006 Elections Were Hacked
8 years ago
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111806B.shtml

    Clear Evidence 2006 Congressional Elections Hacked
    By Rob Kall
    OpEd News

    Friday 17 November 2006

    Results skewed nationwide in favor of Republicans by 4 percent, 3 million votes.

    A major undercount of Democratic votes and an overcount of Republican votes in US House and Senate races across the country is indicated by an analysis of national exit polling data, by the Election Defense Alliance (EDA), a national election integrity organization.

    These findings have led EDA to issue an urgent call for further investigation into the 2006 election results and a moratorium on deployment of all electronic election equipment.

    "We see evidence of pervasive fraud, but apparently calibrated to political conditions existing before recent developments shifted the political landscape," said attorney Jonathan Simon, co-founder of Election Defense Alliance, "so 'the fix' turned out not to be sufficient for the actual circumstances." Explained Simon, "When you set out to rig an election, you want to do just enough to win. The greater the shift from expectations, (from exit polling, pre-election polling, demographics) the greater the risk of exposure--of provoking investigation. What was plenty to win on October 1 fell short on November 7.

    "The findings raise urgent questions about the electoral machinery and vote counting systems used in the United States," according to Sally Castleman, National Chair of EDA. "This is a nothing less than a national indictment of the vote counting process in the United States!"

    "The numbers tell us there absolutely was hacking going on, just not enough to overcome the size of the actual turnout. The tide turned so much in the last few weeks before the election. It looks for all the world that they'd already figured out the percentage they needed to rig, when the programming of the vote rigging software was distributed weeks before the election, and it wasn't enough," Castleman commented.

    Election Defense Alliance data analysis team leader Bruce O'Dell, whose expertise is in the design of large-scale secure computer and auditing systems for major financial institutions, stated, "The logistics of mass software distribution to tens or even hundreds of thousands of voting machines in the field would demand advance planning - at least several weeks - for anyone attempting very large-scale, systematic e-voting fraud, particularly in those counties that allow election equipment to be taken home by poll workers prior to the election.

    "The voting equipment seems to be designed to support two types of vote count manipulation - techniques accessible to those with hands-on access to the machines in a county or jurisdiction, and wholesale vulnerabilities in the underlying behavior of the systems which are most readily available to the vendors themselves. Malicious insiders at any of the vendors would be in a position to alter the behavior of literally thousands of machines by infecting or corrupting the master copy of the software that's cloned out to the machines in the field. And the groundwork could be laid well in advance. For this election, it appears that such changes would have to have been done by early October at the latest," O'Dell explained.

    In a reprise of his efforts on Election Night 2004, Jonathan Simon captured the unadjusted National Election pool (NEP) data as posted on CNN.com, before it was later "adjusted" to match the actual vote counts. The exit poll data that is seen now on the CNN site has been adjusted already. But Simon points out that both adjusted and unadjusted data were instrumental to exposing the gross miscount.

    Simon, surprised that unadjusted polling data was publicly revealed, given the concerns after the 2004 election about the use of exit polls, downloaded as much of the data as he could in real time. Scheduled and planned revisions on the CNN site took place throughout the evening and by the following morning, the unadjusted exit poll data had been replaced with data that conformed with the reported, official vote totals. This was the planned procedure as indicated by the NEP's methodology.

    Adjusting the exit poll data is, by itself, not a troublesome act. Simon explained, "Their advertised reason to do the exit polls is to enable analysis of the results by academic researchers - they study the election dynamics and demographics so they can understand which demographic groups voted what ways. As an analytic tool, the exit poll is considered more serviceable if it matches the vote count. Since the vote count is assumed to be gospel, congruence with that count is therefore assumed to give the most accurate picture of the behavior of the electorate and its subgroups.

    "In 2004 they had to weight it very heavily, to the point that the party turnout was 37% Democrat and 37% Republican, which has never been the case - leading to the claim that Rove turned out the Republican vote. This was nowhere witnessed, no lines in Republican voting places were reported. As ridiculous as that was, the distortion of actual turnout was even greater in 2006. The adjusted poll's sample, to match the vote count, had to consist of 49% 2004 Bush voters and only 43% 2004 Kerry voters, more than twice the actual margin of 2.8%. This may not seem like that much, but it translates into more than a 3,000,000 vote shift nationwide, which, depending on targeting, was enough to have altered the outcome of dozens of federal races.

Continued...



Anonymous
8 years ago
 "It should be very clear that weighting by a variety of carefully selected demographic categories, which yields the pre-adjustment exit polls, presents a truly representative electorate by every available standard except the vote count in the present election. So you have a choice: you can believe in an electorate composed of the correct proportions of men and women, young and old, rural and urban, ethnic and income groups, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents - or you can believe the machines. Anyone who has ever wondered what is really in a hot dog should be aware that the machines are designed, programmed, deployed, and serviced by avowedly partisan vendors, and can easily be set up to generate entirely false counts with no one the wiser, least of all the voters."

    Simon concluded, "These machines are completely and utterly black box. The idea that we have this enormous burden of proof that they are miscounting, and there's no burden of proof that they are counting accurately - that, first and foremost, has to change."

    Election Defense Alliance issued the following statement:

    As in 2004, the exit polling data and the reported election results don't add up. "But this time there is an objective yardstick in the methodology which establishes the validity of the Exit Poll and challenges the accuracy of the election returns," said Jonathan Simon, co-founder of Election Defense Alliance. The Exit Poll findings are detailed in a paper published today on the EDA website.

    The 2006 Edison-Mitofsky Exit Poll was commissioned by a consortium of major news organizations. Its conclusions were based on the responses of a very large sample, of over ten thousand voters nationwide*, and posted at 7:07 p.m. Election Night, on the CNN website. That Exit Poll showed Democratic House candidates had out-polled Republicans by 55.0 percent to 43.5 percent - an 11.5 percent margin - in the total vote for the US House, sometimes referred to as the "generic" vote.

    By contrast, the election results showed Democratic House candidates won 52.7 percent of the vote to 45.1 percent for Republican candidates, producing a 7.6 percent margin in the total vote for the U.S. House ... 3.9 percent less than the Edison-Mitofsky poll. This discrepancy, far beyond the poll's +/- 1 percent margin of error, has less than a one in 10,000 likelihood of occurring by chance.

    By Wednesday afternoon the Edison-Mitofsky poll had been adjusted, by a process known as "forcing," to match the reported vote totals for the election. This forcing process is done to supply data for future demographic analysis, the main purpose of the Exit Poll. It involved re-weighting every response so that the sum of those responses matched the reported election results. The final result, posted at 1:00 p.m. November 8, showed the adjusted Democratic vote at 52.6 percent and the Republican vote at 45.0 percent, a 7.6 percent margin exactly mirroring the reported vote totals.

    The forcing process in this instance reveals a great deal. The Party affiliation of the respondents in the original 7:07 p.m. election night Exit Poll closely reflected the 2004 Bush-Kerry election margin. After the forcing process, 49-percent of respondents reported voting for Republican George W. Bush in 2004, while only 43-percent reported voting for Democrat John Kerry. This 6-percent gap is more than twice the size of the actual 2004 Bush margin of 2.8 percent, and a clear distortion of the 2006 electorate.

    There is a significant over-sampling of Republican voters in the adjusted 2006 Exit Poll. It simply does not reflect the actual turnout on Election Day 2006.

    EDA's Simon says, "It required some incredible distortions of the demographic data within the poll to bring about the match with reported vote totals. It not only makes the adjusted Exit Poll inaccurate, it also reveals the corresponding inaccuracy of the reported election returns which it was forced to equal. The Democratic margin of victory in US House races was substantially larger than indicated by the election returns."

    "Many will fall into the trap of using this adjusted poll to justify inaccurate official vote counts, and vice versa," adds Bruce O'Dell, EDA's Data Analysis Coordinator, "but that's just arguing in circles. The adjusted exit poll is a statistical illusion. The weighted but unadjusted 7 pm exit poll, which sampled the correct proportion of Kerry and Bush voters and also indicated a much larger Democratic margin, got it right." O'Dell and Simon's paper, detailing their analysis of the exit polls and related data, is now posted on the EDA website.

    The Election Defense Alliance continues to work with other election integrity groups around the country to analyze the results of specific House and Senate races. That data and any evidence of election fraud, malicious attacks on election systems, or other malfunctions that may shed more light on the discrepancy between exit polls and election results will be reported on EDA's website.

Comtinued...






  
Anonymous
8 years ago
This controversy comes amid growing public concern about the security and accuracy of electronic voting machines, used to count approximately 80 percent of the votes cast in the 2006 election. The Princeton University Center for Information Technology Policy, in a September 2006 study, was the latest respected institution to expose significant flaws in the design and software of one of the most popular electronic touch-screen voting machines, the AccuVote-TS, manufactured by Diebold, Inc. The Princeton report described the machine as "vulnerable to a number of extremely serious attacks that undermine the accuracy and credibility of the vote counts it produces." These particular machines were used to count an estimated 10 percent of votes on Election Day 2006.

    A separate "Security Assessment of the Diebold Optical Scan Voting Terminal," released by the University of Connecticut VoTeR Center and Department of Computer Science and Engineering last month, concluded that Diebold's Accuvote-OS machines, optical scanners which tabulate votes cast on paper ballots, are also vulnerable to "a devastating array of attacks." Accuvote-OS machines are even more widely used than the AccuVote-TS.

    Similar vulnerabilities affect other voting equipment manufacturers, as revealed last summer in a study by the Brennan Center at New York University which noted all of America's computerized voting systems "have significant security and reliability vulnerabilities, which pose a real danger to the integrity of national, state, and local elections."

    The most prudent response to this controversy is a moratorium on the further implementation of computerized voting systems. EDA's O'Dell cautioned, "It is so abundantly clear that these machines are not secure, there's no justification for blind confidence in the election system given such dramatic indications of problems with the official vote tally." And EDA's Simon summarized, "There has been a rush by some to celebrate 2006 as a fair election, but a Democratic victory does not equate with a fair election. It's wishful thinking at best to believe that the danger of massive election rigging is somehow past."

    EDA continues to call for a moratorium on the deployment of electronic voting machines in US elections; passage of H.R. 6200, which would require hand-counted paper ballots for presidential elections beginning in 2008; and adoption of the Universal Precinct Sample (UP handcount sampling protocol for verification of federal elections as long as electronic election equipment remains in use.

    The Exit Poll analysis is a part of Election Defense Alliance's six-point strategy to defend the accuracy and transparency of the 2006 elections. In addition to extensive analysis of polling data, EDA has been engaged in independent exit polling, election monitoring, legal interventions, and documentation of election irregularities.

    *The sample was a national sample of all voters who voted in House races. It was drawn just like the 2004 sample of the presidential popular vote. That is, precincts were chosen to yield a representative (once stratified) sample of all voters wherever they lived/voted - including early and absentee voters and voters in districts where House candidates ran unopposed but were listed on the ballot and therefore could receive votes. As such, the national sample EDA worked with is exactly comparable to the total aggregate vote for the House that we derived from reported vote totals and from close estimates in cases of the few unopposed candidates where 2006 figures were unavailable but prior elections could be used as proxy. It is a very large sampling of the national total, with a correspondingly small (+/-1%) MOE. There were four individual districts sampled for reasons known only to Edison/Mitofsky

Anonymous
throwing the election
8 years ago
so, when we lose the election, the republicans stole it, and when we win the election, the repugs threw the election? is there ever a clean election? just curious.
8 years ago
Just Say NO to Vote Thieves on the Federal Elections Commission - Stop Von Spakovsky US Politics & Gov&apos;t  (tags: corruption, elections, bushadministration, votingrights, racism )
 Thomas Thomas has received 79 new, 535 total stars from Care2 membersThomas has been awarded 248 butterflies for taking action at Care2Thomas has 16 Golden Notes. - 1 hour ago - blackagendareport.com:80
Georgia attorney Hans von Spakovsky was one of the architects of the Florida 2000 scam which deprived hundreds of thousands of black Floridians of their right to vote because their names resembled those of alleged felons... the rollback of voting rights!

Take Action!

You can help make sure your senators do the right thing and oppose von Spakovsky's nomination. It takes only a moment.

http://www.colorofchange.org/vonspakovsky/?id=1644-181281

Anonymous
5 years ago

any updates on this??

Here's an interesting update
5 years ago

MILWAUKEE – Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen announced today that the Milwaukee Election Fraud Task Force has brought additional electoral fraud cases against five Wisconsin residents.  The Department of Justice, acting as Special Prosecutor for Milwaukee County, has filed felony charges against Maria Miles, Kevin Clancy, Michael Henderson, Herbert Gunka, and Suzanne Gunka, all alleging election fraud arising out of the November 4, 2008, Presidential Election.

“The integrity of elections is dependent upon citizens and officials insisting they be conducted lawfully. Wisconsin’s citizens should not have to wonder whether their vote has been negated or diminished by illegally cast ballots,” Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said.

According to the criminal complaints, Miles and Clancy served as Special Registration Deputies (“SRD” for the City of Milwaukee in advance of the 2008 Presidential Election.  Each worked for the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (“ACORN”.  Miles and Clancy are each charged with the felony offense of Falsely Procuring Voter Registration as Party to a Crime.  The complaint alleges that Miles and Clancy submitted multiple voter registration applications for the same individuals, and also were part of a scheme in which they and other SRDs registered each other to vote multiple times in order to meet voter registration quotas imposed by ACORN.

Henderson is charged with one count of Voting by a Disqualified Person and one count of Providing False Information to Election Officials, both felonies.  The complaint alleges that Henderson registered to vote at the polls on November 4, 2008, thereby certifying that he was a qualified elector.  It also alleges that he then cast a ballot.  At that time, Henderson was on an active period of probation for felony convictions from Rock County.  A felon on an active period of supervision for a felony offense is prohibited by state law from voting in any election.

Herbert and Suzanne Gunka are each charged with the felony offense of Double Voting.  The complaint alleges that they each voted in the November 2008 election by casting absentee ballots before the election.  The complaint also alleges that after casting absentee ballots, they each voted in person at their polling place on election day.

Each individual charge carries a potential penalty of imprisonment up to 3 ½ years and a $10,000 fine.  All defendants are ordered in for an initial appearance on April 20, 2010, at 1:30 p.m.

http://www.doj.state.wi.us/absolutenm/anmviewer.asp?a=1848&z=1

Another Update
5 years ago

ACORN, the liberal group notorious for allegedly trying to inflate voter rolls through fraudulent practices, has seen its last election in Ohio.

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now will permanently surrender its Ohio business license by June1 as part of a legal settlement with the conservative Buckeye Institute for Public Policy Solutions, both sides said yesterday.

ACORN was active in Ohio in the 2006 and 2008 elections, working to register thousands of low-income people to vote and get them to the polls. The group’s efforts were marred by irregularities, including one case in which ACORN workers allegedly induced a Cleveland man to register to vote 72 times, offering cigarettes as an incentive.

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/03/11/copy/acorn-is-out-of-ohios-elections.html?adsec=politics&sid=101