Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The recount is being compromised!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:27 PM
Original message
The recount is being compromised!
The recount will be sabotaged if something is not done SOON! Read the various "Ohio reports" on Cobb's website for the horrible details... Non-random selection, observers in Lucas Co. not being allowed to see the initial results, and--worst of all IMO--most of it being done on unverified central computers. If they were rigged THEN, they are rigged NOW.

I have written Arnebeck about it. I don't know if he can do anything, but I don't know what else to do. We've got to have a full hand count, or, at the VERY least, have the computers backed up, wiped, and the software reinstalled with no "fixes." Here's my letter, minus my contact info:



Dear Mr. Arnebeck,

I applaud your work in compiling data for the Contest of Election suit in Ohio. As you know, recent reports indicate that the central vote tabulating equipment may have been compromised--rigged to give a certain outcome. At least, that is what I immediately suspect when an employee of the company that makes the equipment advises election officials to report false data so that the ballots will be run through the machines rather than counted by hand.

Now several Ohio counties--including WARREN, home of the infamous bogus terrorism warning--have conducted their "recounts" on these very same machines because the initial 3 percent showed no discrepancies. Warren County apparently showed a gain of 2 votes for Bush and 1 for Kerry. Given the number cast in that county, as well as the statistical anomalies that your suit addresses, that seems fishy to me. The report on Warren County can be found on David Cobb's website.

Warren County picked its random 3 percent by drawing the precincts out of a box. Unless we can see exactly what went into it, there is no way of knowing that they didn't pre-select only precincts that had not been tampered with, so that there would be no threat of a hand count.

I am a software engineer. I can assure you that if the tabulators are rigged, it is definitely possible to write a vote-rigging program with two "routines"--one that correctly counts the votes the first time, in order to trigger the machine count, and a second that switches, discards, or produces ghost votes according to whatever algorithm is implemented. I expect I could do it myself.

If the tabulators were compromised on November 2, they are compromised today. In the words of Rep. Conyers, it is "outrageous"--this time, outrageous that these machines are being used without having been verified and pronounced clean, that is, if a machine count must be done. It would seem that the computers can be "cleaned" simply by formatting the hard drive, reinstalling the operating system, and reinstalling the election software--with no secret "upgrades." (Of course, the hard drive would be backed up beforehand.)

Again, I applaud your work--and it is because I have such respect for what you have done that I ask you to please look into getting a court order to halt the use of un-audited central tabulators in the recount. There would seem to be just cause for doing so, given the news from Hocking County. John Kerry asked for the machines to be validated and apparently did not get the request granted. If the recount is conducted on these things, then it will be every bit as questionable--and probably fraudulent--as the initial count. This must not be allowed to happen.


Thank you,

(Firespirit)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sorry... address
If anyone else wants to do this, his addy is arnebeck (at) AOL.... convert to e-mail address format.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
2. kick!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrUnderhill Donating Member (650 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. Does the law require random precincts?
I know Kerry requested it, but do they HAVE to?

Also, there are two Democrats on each of these Boards of Election and they should be representing us during the hand counting (where the machines are irrelevant).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Random precincts required by law. Auditing NOT required.
Hence the need for the court order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrUnderhill Donating Member (650 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Are we saying..
Edited on Wed Dec-15-04 04:43 PM by MrUnderhill
That the Democrats on each County's Board would cheat us?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. I am talking about the computers
If they're rigged, in all likelihood few people even know about it. (I mean know for a fact.)

And as for recount misbehavior, just read the Lucas and Warren County reports on http://www.votecobb.org/press/.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrUnderhill Donating Member (650 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Right... but even if they are rigged...
That wouldn't impact a hand count of randomly selected precincts. There would be actual punch cards that relate to actual signatures of voters. If a hand count came up substantially (or exactly) the same on those precincts, the machines wouldn't have even touched them yet.

Too much of the current CT requires the Democrats on the BOE to be complicit/incompetent. This is beggining to stretch the bounds of believability.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Maybe not.. but that's the whole point.
If you (not you personally) had written and installed a vote-switching "fix," you wouldn't want the initial count to have discrepancies.

And not all counties are using random methods. I know it's against the law, but there you have it.

The card reader or optiscan reader wouldn't ITSELF be hacked, necessarily. But if the computer is programmed to display different numbers than are being sent to it by the scanner... THERE is your fix.

This hypothetical program would do the first precinct correctly, not finding any errors. The preliminary count of a non-hacked non-random precinct is fine... there is no need to recheck the machine, so it isn't done.

Then, when the second round of ballots goes in... our "fix" kicks in.

I agree that there would not be a BoE meeting where the Repubs say, "hey, let's get a vote-rigging program installed" and the Dems say, "oh yes, I'm cool with that."

This doesn't require Democrats to be complicit at all. They would have no way of knowing what was being put into the computer. Just one simple "repairman," maybe with a legitimate purpose, does the maintenance, but installs something else along with it. Perhaps even he himself doesn't know what it really does.

Incompetent... well, you could make that claim, I guess, but I think THAT is a stretch.

Not trying to start a fight, just my $0.02.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dewaldd Donating Member (185 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. yes, but since when do these guys follow the law or tell the truth?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dewaldd Donating Member (185 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. Lynn Landes was right--the recount will just be a self-inflicted wound
And they hurt the most.

Paper trail is meaningless.

Ballots must be publicly hand-counted at the polling place on election night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jamboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. No because recount is smoking out the frauds via their inept coverups.
Then we'll be able to proceed vs them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smartvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #9
13. Agreed. The more they dink around, the more ammo we gain. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. You are right there
Smoke em out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. Smoking out the fraud?!?
Have you not been following the reports?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Huh???
Smoking out the criminals that are covering their tracks in a hasty and incompetent manner.

And yes I have been following the reports, but thanks for asking...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. I hope not
If this thing were being done in an honest manner, and it showed a * win... I could deal with it.

I can accept a * win with a full, open, hand count. It'll be a disappointment, but I'm bloody used to that now.

The way I see it... we need this because we need to know what direction to take.

Massive fraud, and the flip-flop of the century (aka Kerry win) ==> FIX THE SYSTEM. Immediately. Then investigate and imprison all responsible.
Minor fraud, not affecting outcome ==> Analyze what went wrong w/turnout, campaign, exit polls, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not_Without_A_Fight Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Totally agree
Edited on Wed Dec-15-04 04:48 PM by Not_Without_A_Fight
:pals:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eomer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #11
23. Minor fraud, not affecting outcome ==>
Keep looking until we explain the major (not minor) discrepancy between exit poll and certified result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #4
27. Indeed that is the greatest risk
You have to go in with specific goals and a strategy for insuring you do not fail in achieving them.
You also need a good PR crew.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. kickety kick kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quakerfriend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Kick it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
12. Link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Firespirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. Volunteer reports
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not_Without_A_Fight Donating Member (61 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:44 PM
Response to Original message
14. What can we do???
Thanks for your work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
18. Convicted Felons, ‘Shadowy Financiers' Own Companies Counting Votes
Edited on Wed Dec-15-04 04:55 PM by Al-CIAda
Pt. I: Convicted Felons, ‘Shadowy Financiers' Own Companies Counting Votes
 
Venice,FL. 
by Daniel Hopsicker
 
An investigation into the surprisingly-sordid history of America’s “election services industry” has revealed that executives and owners of the two largest companies, E S & S and Sequoia Pacific, have been convicted of bribery and suborning public officials in more than a dozen states.

And while a felony conviction may be enough to prevent you from voting in Florida, convicted felons can take heart in the fact that the “blemish” on their record in no way disqualifies them from owning companies counting the votes.

In fact, the word ‘coverup’ itself was invented to describe the activities of the original owner of Sequoia Pacific, "shadowy financier" Lewis Wolfson, who got caught bribing no less a personage than a Supreme Court Justice of the United States of America.

While Abe Fortas was forced to resign in disgrace, no such harsh fate befell Wolfson.  When you own a company that counts the votes, politicians smile more kindly on you than they might otherwise... and for good reason.


"Somebody Blinked"

Continuing this dubious 'tradition,' the owner of Sequoia Pacific until recently was also accused of bribing public officials, in this case the Prime Minister of Ireland.

While the name Dr. Michael Smurfit is not well-known to Americans, his company manufactures the software used to compile more than two-thirds of the nation's electronically-counted votes.

Perhaps this may help explain why, for the second Presidential election in a row, a Democratic bandwagon was derailed early on Election Night by an unusual television appearance by the Bush Family, after exit polls showed them losing in key battleground states.

While what transpired remains closely guarded, whatever went on behind the scenes was clearly decisive: Bush took the lead in the election, and John Kerry suffered the same fate as Al Gore had four years earlier...perhaps even in the same way.

 
"A Spaghetti Western Would Have Been Better"

Prima facie evidence that this year’s American Presidential Election was fixed can be found in the recent statements by numerous computer security experts that it could have been. And if it could have been, it probably was...

“If you leave the door to the bank vault open, sooner or later you’re going to get robbed,” said one.  “Its just human  nature. And besides, fixing elections is far more lucrative than robbing banks.”

Analysts describe the software as "spaghetti code," tangled strands of instructions indecipherable to outsiders. Experts say the code can be manipulated without detection. In fact, many believe it may have happened already.

So it may be of interest to learn the Smurfit (the richest man in Ireland, though he’s not Irish) has a penchant for hanging out at Geneva racetracks with international gamblers and Zurich currency speculators. He must have a habit for picking winners, too: his company was successful in suborning the Louisiana Commissioner of Elections for over a decade...

Jerry Fowler had run up some big gambling debts at Harrah's in Atlantic City, we learned. So he found the chance to pay off by making his voting machines "pay off" irresistible. In all, 22 people were indicted, 9 pled guilty, and Fowler went to jail.

But the Sequoia Pacific "Southeast Sales Manager," a man named Pasquale "Rocco" Ricci of Marlton, New Jersey, barely even got a slap on the wrist. For the crime of suborning democracy in the state of Louisiana for over a decade, Mr. Ricci was sentenced to just a year...

A year of home detention.

Through multi-billion dollar federal subsidies, electronic voting has been pushed onto the American electorate. And its not hard to see why... the heady prospect of a sure thing.

But America may never again have an honest Presidential election.

Former Manhattan Commissioner of Elections Douglas Kellner told the MadCowMorningNews, “The problem is that, with an electronic voting system, you can never be sure that the vote is being recorded the same way it was cast. Because the only record is done electronically, there is no paper audit trail.

“And any good computer person can alter the electronic record.”

Most Americans, if they think about it at all, expect that the people standing behind the voting machines on which their votes are cast and tallied look like computer experts wearing white lab coats from IBM.

Nothing could be further from the truth.
 

"They Could Steal the Presidency!"

Investigating the ownership of the two companies that together dominate the American elections industry reveals evidence of routine and systemic bribery of public officials, not just here but overseas (the recent Prime Minister of Ireland, to give just one example.)

It is a world filled—not with guys in lab coats and pocket protectors—but with guys with links to the Mob, or international money launderers, Zurich currency manipulators, telecom scandals, off-shore Channel Islands accounts in the names of fictitious people, "untraceable shareholders," Bahamian resort owners, and supra-national financiers.

Tests performed and videotaped by candidate Susan Bernacker in New Orleans in 1994 demonstrated that votes she cast for herself were electronically recorded for her opponent. This test was repeated multiple times with the same result thus confirming that the machine had been fraudulently altered to influence the outcome of the election. In Louisiana there, was an election in 1996 , which was for local

After Susan Bernacker lost a New Orleans City Council race in 1994, she decided to exercise her legal right to inspect the voting machines three days after the election... and she took along a video camera.

(The shocking results can be seen in our documentary "The Big Fix 2000". )

Three times she keyed in her own name on the voting machines. and three times a vote for her opponent was registered. After these proceedings she perhaps justly feared for her life if she kept the secret to herself...She  convened a hastily-called press conference, and then retired from public life.
 
"A Nostradamus for our times"

"The next president of the United States may not be chosen by the voters of the United States. Instead, he or she may be the choice of whomever controls or manipulates the computer systems that tally the votes," wrote Ronnie Dugger in the New York Times a decade ago.

"With the entire system shrouded in mystery and absent of assurances that the voting process is tamper-proof, voters these days have more reason than ever to ask, "Does my vote count?" "The whole damn thing is mind-boggling," said someone who investigates computerized elections. "They could steal the presidency."

“I don’t believe in counting votes in secret,” Manhattan Commissioner Doug Kellner told us.  “I think the public has a right to see what’s happening at every step of the way.”

The problem is so manifestly obvious that even humor columnist Dave Barry was moved to offer a desperate solution, in the Miami Herald: "My suggestion - call me crazy - is that we print the ballot on paper, with a box next to each candidate's name. We instruct a voter to put an X in their candidate's box. Then we have human beings count the Xs."

Sounds easy, practical, and cheap.

In the coming weeks we’ll see why they’ll never let that happen.

http://www.madcowprod.com/mc6912004.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ivorysteve Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #18
24. Kick
I'm a software engineer, too, and the whole state of this voting technology, and its opacity, has horrified me. I agree - this recount is worthless without it being a handcount, without knowing what the machines are doing under the covers. Unfortunately, it seems that the recount laws weren't written by technologists, so they left the biggest door wide open.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shalom Donating Member (832 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-15-04 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
26. A Whore Has Already Been Compromised After the "1st Trick" nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC