Election Fraud News 07.11.06 More MEXICO (great stuff) + Hillary Nails It

[autorank]

Here’s why they’re in the streets. Did you see this in the NYT or the Miami Herald? Oh, that’s right, they must not know how to use the internet. Sorry for the implication of censorship.

In addition, it was learned that Felipe Calderon's brother-in-law Diego Hildebrando Zavala wrote the vote-counting software, and it's already been hacked. This new discovery is especially disturbing as whoever controls the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) computer systems can manipulate the vote process, control which votes get counted, which ones don't, and what the final vote tally will be. The opportunity and temptation for fraud was therefore in the hands of the declared winner's close family member and ally with every reason to believe he'd take full advantage.

Stephen Lendman
ThePeoplesVoice.org

http://tinyurl.com/k6aun

…and that’s one of the many reasons the people are in the streets. They know the score.

There's a dark cloud over Mexico...the denial of democracy creates a tempest.

Never forget the pursuit of Truth.
Only the deluded & complicit accept election results on blind faith.
Denying that 2004 was stolen is like denying global warming.

Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News, Monday July 11,, 2006

All members welcome and encouraged to participate.

Please post Election Reform, Fraud, & Related News on this thread.
1. Post stories and announcements you find on the web.
2. Post stories using the "Election Fraud and Reform News Sources" listed here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x371233
3. Re-post stories and announcements you find on DU, providing a link to the original thread with thanks to the Original Poster, too.
4. Start a discussion thread by re-posting a story you see on this thread.
Please

"Recommend"

for the Greatest Page

*Attn. Rumpel and Stevepol: It’s déjà vu all over again;)

www.ElectionFraudNews.com

[autorank]

1. Mexico: A Full Recount would show an Obrador Victory (Narco News)

When you read this, match it up against the coverage by the NYT and Miami Herald. This is just outrageous. The least CM (corporate media) could do is crib form NarcoNews, Palast, or Laura Carlson of America’s Project. Why don’t we get this news. Oh, I guessed it! It is the same formula that CM serves up to “management” on any election issue. Remember, the last illusion is that our votes are actually counted fairly. When that goes, “management” will have no rationale, given they’ve screwed up everything else.

NarcoNews:
A Full Recount Would Show that López Obrador Won Mexico’s Presidency by More than One Million Votes

The Tip of the Iceberg of the Crimes Committed by Mexican Electoral Authorities Is the Fraudulent Vote Count of 2006

By Al Giordano
Part II of a Special Series for The Narco News Bulletin
http://tinyurl.com/mrpon

July 8, 2006

Commercial Media organizations are reporting that Felipe Calderòn won Sunday’s presidential election by 0.58 percent of the vote and will govern Mexico for the next six years, beginning on December 1.

It would not be the first time that the Commercial Media has been wrong.

Many of those reports have claimed that Wednesday’s first official count of precinct results in Mexico – 130,000 pieces of paper that claim to represent the vote tallies – was a “recount.”

It would not be the first time that lazy “pack journalism” got a major international story wrong.

The truth: No recount occurred on Wednesday, or before, or since. What occurred – we repeat – was only the first official count of precinct tallies.

A Narco News investigation has found that in the small sample of precincts – less than one percent – where a recount was allowed, the shift in numbers away from Calderón was so drastic that, if recounts of all the ballots followed the same trend, the official results would invert and Andrés Manuel López Obrador would become the clear winner of the presidency by more than one million votes-

Mexico: Fox Government Elections Officials Screw Mexicans in USA out of Vote

CM again. I actually wrote about Mexico providing facilities for 10 million Mexican citizens in the USA based on a CM report way back. Nothing like that happened. Just 40,000 showed up. Now I know why! Couldn’t CM read NarcoNews? Just asking.

[AuntiBush]

14. kick

One Million votes!?!

NarcoNews:
A Full Recount Would Show that López Obrador Won Mexico’s Presidency by More than One Million Votes

[autorank]

2. Mexico: Fox Government Elections Officials Screw Mexicans in USA out of V

CM again. I actually wrote about Mexico providing facilities for 10 million Mexican citizens in the USA based on a CM report way back. Nothing like that happened. Just 40,000 showed up. Now I know why! Couldn’t CM read NarcoNews? Just asking.

NarcoNews:
Mexico’s “Democracy” Spurns Millions of Immigrants that Sustain Its Economy
The “Trickery” of the PAN Takes Aim Against Foreign Votes Not in its Favor

By Margarita Salazar
The Other Journalism with the Other Campaign on the Other Side
http://tinyurl.com/s7dlk
July 9, 2006

Los Angeles, California.- Even though Mexican immigrants sent $20 billion in remittances back home in 2005, as many as 10 million potential voters were sidelined from Mexico’s electoral “democracy” by the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE, in its Spanish initials) during the country’s 2006 presidential race. The party of the presumed winner, the National Action Party (PAN), once again showed its scorn for the downtrodden, denying them their right to vote through sly trickery.

As those remittances poured in last year, Mexican legislators reformed the Federal Code of Institutions and Electoral Procedures (COFIPE) to allow more than four million interested Mexicans to vote in the presidential elections. However, a previous estimate by the IFE put the number of eligible voters in the United States at 10 million.

Nonetheless, a few months before the July 2 elections, immigrants discovered these measures were no more than a blatant ruse, denying them access to voting booths that could have easily been installed in consulates and embassies to facilitate the process.

Instead, in April, authorities mailed electoral packages to more than 40,000 registered Mexicans so that they could vote via express mail. These packages only went out to those who dished out the $9 registration fee needed to be inscribed on the electoral list.

[autorank]

3. Mexico: Obrador Presents Video Evidence on Election Fraud

What a concept, an actual hearing. Remember, we never got this in 2004, nothing…courts threw us out, congress helped 3 day old election rights groups set up by Republicans testify…nothing here, zip, zilch, nada. So at least Mexico has a process.

Reuters
Mexico leftist cries fraud with election videos

Mon Jul 10, 2006 6:34pm ET6
http://tinyurl.com/lyxu5

By Greg Brosnan

MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - The leftist candidate who lost a contested Mexican presidential election showed what he called video proof of fraud on Monday and would not commit to accepting a court ruling on the results.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the former mayor of Mexico City, has asked an electoral court to reverse a narrow victory in the July 2 election for conservative Felipe Calderon of the ruling National Action Party or PAN.

On Monday, Lopez Obrador played amateur video that he said documented acts of fraud by his rivals. Questioned by reporters, he also said only that he would wait to see the court ruling on his lawsuit before deciding if he would accept it.

Lopez Obrador, who lost by less than 1 percentage point, is rallying his supporters to take part in mass protests this week to call attention to his claims that the vote count was manipulated in favor of Calderon.

[autorank]

4. Mexico: Democracy Mexican Style

This is a great resource. Book mark it. THE WINNING CANDIDATES BROTHER IN LAW WROTE THE VOTING SOFTWARE IN MEXICO. Damn, hadn’t heard that yet. What a joke. Why have we not heard that. It would convince the American public immediately that this was a stiker.

Democracy, Mexican Style - Part II
By: Stephen Lendman

http://tinyurl.com/k6aun

There's much happening in Mexico in the aftermath of the nation's most contentious election ever, but it began many months before the first vote was cast. The popularity of leftist opposition candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) scared the ruling National Action Party (PAN) enough to get them to try to deny him the right to run for president in the election just concluded.



In April, 2005, a commission of four members of the Chamber of Deputies (Mexico's Congress) held there was sufficient cause to suspect Obrador committed a crime when he ordered the construction of a service road to a hospital ignoring a judge's order against doing it. Obrador said he was just widening the road and stopped when he learned of the court order. The full Chamber ignored his explanation and then voted to strip him of his government immunity from prosecution so he could be indicted, have to stand trial and be constitutionally barred from holding or running for high office. The transparent scheme didn't work because the people of Mexico wouldn't tolerate it and turned out in mass street protests to support him.

That mass support succeeded in getting the ruling PAN to back down from its attempt to keep Obrador off the ballot but not in the shoddy campaign tactics they decided to use against him. Because of his popularity, Obrador was a serious candidate who would likely win easily in a fair election. But there's nothing fair about Mexican politics where the notions of dirty tricks and hardball tactics could have been invented.

From early on in the campaign, the Mexican corporate media and ruling business-friendly right wing parties attacked Obrador viciously as an evil twin of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, falsely accusing him of receiving campaign funds from the Venezuelan President and being guilty of corruption during his time as mayor of Mexico City. The ads also accused him of being a "danger" for Mexico. In addition, government instigated street violence in an attempt to break a teachers strike in Oaxaca (ed. By using helicopters to tear gas striking teachers who were asleep in front of the government headquarters) and to disrupt events in San Salvador Atenco created tension, stoked fear and were effectively used as political and PR tools to turn enough of the public against Lopez Obrador to erase his once insurmountable lead in the polls to a slim one on election day

- an advantage easily overcome with the shenanigans the ruling party had in mind to use to assure its candidate won.

But Lopez Obrador was lucky PAN officials and their conspiratorial Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) allies didn't intend for him what state officials plotted and pulled off against two other noted state adversaries in the past who paid dearly. General Emiliano Zapata, the Mexican peasant rebel leader who supported agrarian reform and land redistribution in the battles of the Mexican Revolution (a Mexican Simon Bolivar), was assassinated by government troops in 1919. Then in March, 1994, leading opposition candidate Luis Donaldo Colosio met the same fate on the campaign trail in Tijuana. Obrador survived the shabby scheme to keep him off the ballot, was able to run as the opposition candidate, and only paid the price of a defeat at the polls (so far) in an election clearly stolen from him.

[autorank]

5. Voter Disenfranchisement & Suppression

Almost always directed abainst minorities and the poor.

[autorank]

6. OH: Hillary Blasts Ohio Elections Process, Blackwell’s role.

THANK YOU!!!

Associated Press:
Clinton blasts Ohio elections process, Blackwell's role

JULIE CARR SMYTH
Posted on Mon, Jul. 10, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/gd9ro

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, viewed as Democrats' presidential front-runner, cautioned a crowd of 3,000 activists Monday to watch Ohio's fall election "like a hawk" - blasting long lines and voting machine shortages in 2004 and accusing the state's Republican chief elections officer of a conflict of interest.

Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell's campaign for governor accused Clinton, in turn, of an ignorance of Ohio law, which allows the elections leader to run for partisan office and places bipartisan county boards in charge of much that happens on election days.

snip

The group capped off the gathering with a raucous rally at the Statehouse in favor of a fall ballot issue to increase the minimum wage.

I know that year was a problem here in Ohio and I hope, everybody from Ohio, you watch this election like a hawk," Clinton told the gathering. "Don't let them pull anything over your eyes again. I mean, I find it amazing that one of the people running for high office is actually running the elections. That should not be permitted."

[autorank]

7. OH: Apparently they talk;)

Reprise, previously published but relevant! Permission from author for liberal use of quotations, i.e., me

Citizen Clinton Speaks Out:
Former President Raises Cain – Almost

By Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent News
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0607/S00045.htm
Washington, DC
Co-Published at
www.electionfraudnews.com
July 3, 2006


Former President Clinton spoke to the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies on June 17, 2006. He gave the keynote address which covered a number of topics. He even provided his answer to “the fundamental nature of the 21st century” – “interdependence.”

During the question and answer portion of the speech, an audience member made an inquiry about election fraud. Clinton’s response might have gained front page status or at least editorial page controversy if the United States had a function media. It does not.

Audience member to Clinton: Talking about elections, Robert Kennedy Jr. just wrote an article in Rolling Stone claiming the Bush Administration stole the last election. Do you think it was, and how can we guard against something like that going on in the future?

President Clinton: I must say I read Robert Kennedy’s article in Rolling Stone and I think all of you should if you haven’t. And before I read it, I was convinced that President Bush had won Ohio… I… I …thought it would have been ironic if he had lost the election in the Electoral College and won the popular vote, that is if he went out the same way he came in. But… but I think that… I think that -- two things, I think there is no question that Al Gore would have won Florida if all the votes had been counted and the people who intended to vote for him had their votes counted.

This answer is remarkable on several levels. First, he tells the audience to read the article making the case for a stolen election in 2004. Second, he states that Gore’s loss of Florida was due to the most obvious form of election fraud, a failure to count all the votes. Finally, Clinton goes right up to the edge of saying, “…And before I read it, I was convinced that President Bush had won Ohio… I…” This is what is known as a pregnant pause, a moment of simultaneous reflection and silence, in this case, causing him to stop just short of saying “…I…now think he didn’t.” He pauses again when he seems to come back to the first part of the question, was it stolen: “But… but I think that… I think that…” He then continues with what is perhaps a revealing statement about Gore winning had all the votes been counted.

This is my speculation but the pauses reinforce the interpretation. Just a moment later, he addresses the specific question asked, “Do you think it was (stolen)…”

“In this case, I think… You know, I don’t have an opinion, but I thought Robert Kennedy made a very persuasive case and what was clear is that the Secretary of State (of Ohio), now their candidate for governor, was a world class expert in voter suppression and that he was doing everything he could to keep voters that he thought were Democrats from voting, in every way that he could.”

Once again, we have a pause, a presumed reflection and a switch from “I think” to “I don’t have an opinion” paired with a compliment to Robert F. Kennedy’s article, “a very persuasive case.” It appears that the usually fluid speaker’s pauses allowed him to regain his scales-of-justice like balance and pull back from throwing the country into an uproar. Clinton would have set off a fire storm by endorsing the argument that 2004 was stolen and the obvious conclusion, that the Bush presidency is illegitimate.

Regardless of what was not said, Clinton said enough to cause a major controversy. He strongly endorsed the “persuasive” arguments Kennedy made and told the audience that it was worth their time to read the article. This speech was in public at a major convention in Little Rock, Arkansas. Clinton’s endorsement of the RFK Jr. article as persuasive and a must read would have caused a major stir just two weeks after the article’s publication.

It did not. This is just another example of the total lack of a functional main stream media in the United States. There was no reporting on the Clinton endorsement on or after the 17th of June. When the transcript of the article became available on June 30th, it was immediately published in Notes from the Underground, the blog of author and voting rights advocate Professor Mark Crispin Miller of New York University

[tomp]

38. if bill clinton thought bush won ohio...

...he's a freaking dumbass, and we know that's not true. so the question is: why does he want us to think he thought bush won ohio?

does clinton really expect us to believe he's not aware of the evidence of voting and polling irregularities, that he didn't know about ohio before kennedy's article? i refuse to believe bill clinton is that out of the loop. he has to be lying.

kerry's dropping the issue when he promised to fight for every vote looks even more suspicious in light of clinton's statement (lie).

i don't know why the democratic party has not taken up vote reform as a major issue but in the absence of evidence or explanation to the contrary i'm forced to consider complicity.

i'm looking for a reasonable, logical explanation of the above.

[mom cat]

25. Has she sponsored or supported any election reform legislation?

[mod mom]

29. There can be no real election reform until we have control of congress.

the Republicans have no interest in preventing a system that keeps them in power and control. Unfortunately, all the legislation must occur at the state level until R's are out of power. When you have a state like Ohio, where control is in the hands of Republicans we see draconian legislation, like the GOP Suppressive HB 3, being passed.

I agree with MCM, that we must be prepared in the near future not only to take to the streets, but boycott until the will of the people is served.

RFK Jr has done a great service in bringing this issue to the forefront of discussion!

[mod mom]

28. Fitrakis urges "Stop Blackwell from Supervising his Own Election" petition

Fitrakis blog:

Ohio’s 2004 stolen election continues to unravel. Hillary Clinton told the activists of ACORN that they have to watch the Ohio election “like a hawk.” Clinton’s attack on Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell in the aftermath of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s seminal Rolling Stone article is fanning the flames of a new voters’ rights movement in the United States. Perhaps the best piece to come out since the Rolling Stone article is Michael Parenti’s “The Stolen Election of 2004.” Parenti does a good job of summarizing the well-documented Republican strategies that are now corrupting the American democratic process. Here is a link to the Parenti article:

http://www.zmag.org/sustainers/content/2006-07/03parenti.cfm

Rove and the Republicans have taken a page out of the CIA handbook and have done whatever necessary, legally and illegally to subvert democracy. We need to absolutely ignore the corporate mainstream media that pretends that these Jim Crow tactics are just part of the game. We need to continue to fan the flames of discontent and point the fingers at Rove, Bush and Blackwell.

People should support this idea by signing this online petition:

http://www.usalone.com/cgi-bin/petition.cgi?pnum=253

[Joanne98]

34. Sign the petition. This is ridiculous

[mod mom]

33. OH: "Clinton Feeds Theory of OH Vote Tampering"

again, excellent coverage in the Cincinnati Enquirer!

Clinton feeds theory of Ohio vote tampering
Refers to Blackwell in telling crowd he shouldn't run election

BY JON CRAIG AND ALLISON D'AURORA | ENQUIRER COLUMBUS BUREAU

COLUMBUS - U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton took a shot at Secretary of State Ken Blackwell of Cincinnati, the Republican candidate for governor, Monday during her third visit to Ohio this year.

Speaking to more than 3,000 people at a national conference of ACORN - the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now - Clinton prompted whoops and hollers by saying, "Let's make sure that we count every vote in our elections.''

<snip>

Referring to presidential races, Clinton said, "This country deserves to have an electoral system that has integrity. I know there's been a problem here in Ohio, and I hope everybody from Ohio is watching this election like a hawk. Don't let them pull anything over your eyes again.''

Without naming Blackwell, Clinton said, "One of the people running for high office is actually running the election. That should not be permitted. It's a conflict of interest. ... We've got to take back our democracy.''

<snip>

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060711/NEWS01/607110352

[Kurovski]

39. Wow!

Than I guess it really did happen. I was beginning to think Blackwell and the whole Ohio mishigas were all a figment of my overheated imagination...

K&R

[autorank]

8. FL: Florida Today Supporting Voting Rights Act

As well they should

Florida Today:
Our view: Protect voters' rights
Stronger election protections are needed to safeguard the people's voice

July 10, 2006

http://tinyurl.com/rj8v4

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 guaranteed minority citizens in the U.S. the right to vote.

Several of its crucial provisions targeted regions with histories of racial discrimination or large populations of voters who speak limited English, calling for strong oversight by the U.S. Justice Department if they want to change their election process.
That was to avoid illegal disenfranchisement for partisan reasons, and was a victory for democracy.

Some Republicans in the House of Representatives, however, now are saying the special provisions themselves are discriminatory. They are delaying a vote to reauthorize the Act, hoping to let it expire before crucial 2008 elections

[autorank]

9. KS: Radical Reduction of Polling Places = Voter Suppression

it’s certainly the case. I remember when this was first covered a few months ago. Clearly the outcome is going to be fewer voters. The further you move a resource from someone’s home, the less that resource is accessed. They know this out there. Maybe they had temporary amnesia. Thanks to the League of Women Voters, there is a counter campaign to rev things up for the minority and poor community.

The Wichita Eagle
Group works to aid voters

http://tinyurl.com/rx4yp

BY BRENT D. WISTROM AND CATHERINE HO
HOW TO VOTE IN ADVANCE

Alarmed by the elimination of nearly 70 percent of Sedgwick County's polling places, a newly formed voters' coalition is launching an educational campaign it hopes will ensure that everyone who wants to vote in the August primaries can.

The Sedgwick County Voters' Coalition will start with 30-second public service announcements that they hope local TV stations will air, said Ernestine Krehbiel, co-president of the League of Women Voters Wichita-Metro, which is heading up the coalition.

But other calls to action and election concerns will be announced at a news conference this morning, Krehbiel said, "The biggest concern we have is -- whether it's deliberate or accident -- that there will be voter suppression," Krehbiel said. "Democracy in Sedgwick County is being damaged."

The voter awareness campaign comes about two months after The Eagle broke a story about the elimination of more than 140 voting locations and is the first major educational effort to date.

[autorank]

10. CA: Busby election a bell weather for voter discontent

No kidding. The district of Duke Cunningham was created to be Republican forever. They could not lose there without a bigger media stampede. Who knows the actual results? But the fact it’s contested, close enough for that, is stunning. California “district drawing” is really first rate when it comes to taking care of incumbents. People must be furious.

American Chronicle:
Bilbray/Busby Election: The Perceived Threat to Democracy Grows

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=11359

Forrest Hill(Candidate for CA SoS, Greens)

July 9, 2000

Last month's race in California's 50th Congressional District in San Diego County between Republican Brian Bilbray and Democrat Francine Busby was characterized as a bellwether on whether the Democrats would recapture the House in November.

snip

In fact, the response to Bilbray/Busby election by local voters may be more of a bellwether of the level of confidence Americans will have in the November election and the legitimacy of who controls the House in January.

The reasons voters are demanding a recount are not so surprising. The elections were run on Diebold's electronic voting machines. These machines have been shown to be vulnerable to hackers and have produced spurious results throughout the country.

Even more disturbing is the San Diego Registrars complete disregarded for state and federal security laws, as they blithely let poll workers store voting machines in their homes for several days prior to the election. In doing so, these machines were all technically decertified, and thus illegal for use in the election.

[autorank]

11. UT: Officials Will Recount a Race, State Devleoping Recount Procedures

www.ElectionArchive.org has worked hard in Utah to make things work there. One focus has been on recounting, which is just as essential and paper ballots. We’ll see how this comes out.

KCPW TV:
Salt Lake, Utah Counties to Finalize Primary Election Results
Recount Likely in House District 42
http://www.kcpw.org/article/1149


Jul 10, 2006 by Julie Rose

(KCPW News) Elections officials in Salt Lake and Utah Counties will meet Tuesday to finalize primary election results. The board of canvassers in both counties will count absentee and provisional ballots and certify the election results.

"Basically it's pretty much a procedural thing to get the results certified and if a race is closer than one vote per precint, candidates have a week to request a recount in writing," explains Salt Lake County Clerk Sherrie Swensen.

She says tomorrow's meeting with the board of canvassers - comprised of the entire Salt Lake County Council - may entail a bit more debate, given the new voting equipment and some uncertainty over recount procedures. Councilman Joe Hatch says that's definitely on his mind.

"We have one race that may require a recount and if it does, how will that be done and who will administer it under what rules? I intend to ask questions about that," says Hatch.

That race is House District 42 in which challenger Jim Bird is currently 24 votes ahead of incumbent Representative Peggy Wallace. If after the canvass that number is 27 or less, either candidate can request a recount. Wallace says she will.

State elections officials are racing to establish recount procedures, but for the time being, Swensen says Salt Lake County will re-run the memory cards from the electronic voting machines and the optical scan ballots. No plans are in place to manually count the paper printouts from voting machines.

[autorank]

12. AL: Zero Votes for Candidates Raises Questions – Wrong Ballot Use Suspect

Now that’s a primary for you, the voters didn’t notice either or maybe they’ve beaten us down so much, we just vote on anything they give us and don’t complain.

The Associated Press
Questions raised in Mobile County over wrong ballots handed out

Last Updated:July 10. 2006 2:31PM
Published: July 10. 2006 2:31PM
http://tinyurl.com/pkp2h

Questions have been raised over whether some voters in precincts with more than one state House race were given the wrong ballot in the June 6 primary in Mobile County, which was making the switch to paper ballots from electronic voting machines.

State Rep. Joseph Mitchell of Mobile did not receive a single vote at the First Assembly of God precinct in the Democratic primary for House District 103, and neither did his opponent, Thelma Cooke-Thrash, even though 108 voters in the House district are assigned to the precinct.

"Everybody would have had to skip the vote," said Mitchell's wife and campaign manager, Janetta Whitt-Mitchell. "Do you think the poll watcher working for us would have not voted for us?"

The Press-Register reported Monday that claims of being given the wrong ballot were made in other precincts with more than one House race. In such split precincts - there are 25 in Mobile County - voters are to be given the ballot containing the race for the district in which they live.

[AuntiBush]

13. Highly Recommended!

You've outdone yourself on this one, Autorank. Keep up the excellent work!

[AuntiBush]

15. Subpoena of Key Voting Industry Witnesses in Sam Hill, CA

Key witnesses hiding, Make 5 contacts NOW to get subpoenas!

Articles: This has national implications. For the first time ever, we have the opportunity to subpoena key voting industry witnesses to get them under oath in front of a senate hearing to investigate what the Sam Hill they were doing when they created and recommended tamper-friendly voting systems.

We're sure by now you're aware that Calif. did an about face and certified Diebold's entire line of products -- hackable touch screens, hackable optical scanners, and extremely hackable GEMS tabulators -- despite 100% public opposition and numerous attacks proving the systems' fatal flaws and insecurities.

But this isn't just California. Get these people under oath in California, and you get them questioned for the whole nation.

More... http://nov2truth.org/article.php?story=20060220115410131

[bvar22]

16. An honor to give this a K&R!!!

Great Work!
:patriot:

[autorank]

18. bvar22, Thank you!!!

:toast:

[autorank]

17. Elections folk - a little "boost" over in GD for a pointer thread. Gracias

OH my:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2717291&mesg_id=2717291

O8)What they sayO8)

[Wilms]

19. EAC To Assume Oversight Of Voting System Testing And Certification

EAC To Assume Oversight Of Voting System Testing And Certification

By Warren Stewart, VoteTrustUSA

July 10, 2006

According to Section 231 of the Help America Vote Act, the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) is mandated to provide for the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting systems. As the first step in the process the EAC is required to first develop a program for accrediting independent, non-Federal testing laboratories. Responding to a staff recommendation released at a public meeting in Denver, CO last August, the EAC adopted a Voting System Certification & Laboratory Accreditation Program. Under this program the accreditation and oversight of the “Independent Testing Authority” would pass from the National Association of State Election Directors (NASED) to the EAC. That transition is expected to be announced later this month.

Accreditation of laboratories will be undertaken by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP). NVLAP was established by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in 1976 to accredit laboratories that are found competent to perform specific tests or calibrations and to foster and promote a uniformly acceptable base of professional and technical competence in the laboratory community. According to Tom Wilkey, executive director of the EAC, seven laboratories have applied for accreditation along with the three currently accredited by NASED. The accreditation is expected by this Fall.

The current testing and certification procedures originated in a March 1975 report, Effective Use of Computing Technology in Vote-Tallying, which highlighted 'the lack of appropriate technical skills at the State and local level for developing or implementing written standards, against which voting system hardware and software could be evaluated.' It was nine years before another report, Voting System Standards: A Report on the Feasibility of Developing Voluntary Standards for Voting Equipment appeared. In 1984 Congress funded the Federal Election Commission to begin what ended up being a six year process of creating the first national performance and test standards for punchcard, optical scan, and direct recording electronic voting systems. The resulting body of work was the first set of Voluntary Voting System Standards issued in 1990.

snip

While standards had finally been established, there was no mechanism for testing and certifying voting systems to those standards. Under considerable influence from R. Doug Lewis and his Election Center, a testing and certification process was undertaken by NASED, a private organization with no government oversight. There are currently three certified laboratories that collectively constitute the “Independent Testing Authority” or ITA: Ciber, Wyle Labs, and Systest. Arguably this designation is a triple oxymoron. Their “independence” is compromised by the fact that the testing that takes place is paid for by the vendors, in effect making them the ITA’s “clients”. The testing process that does take place and the standards to which voting machines are tested are considerably weaker than other accepted standards for the security of computer-based products. The testing is done in secret and detailed results of the testing are not released for public scrutiny. As for the ITA being “authoritative” there’s little to support such a designation. While the testing of voting system software has been done by several different companies over the past decade the one consistent element is that the testing has always been done by an individual named Shawn Southworth (pictured at right), operating out of Huntsville, Alabama and currently employed by Wyle Labs. Who is Shawn Southworth and what are his qualifications? We are not allowed to know. Like the rest of the process, Mr. Southworth’s credentials are shrouded in secrecy.

Computer scientist Avi Rubin of Johns Hopkins University had this to say about the Independent Testing Authority:

snip

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1489&Itemid=26


Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x439594

[Wilms]

20. OR SoS: "Just Trust US" Is No Longer Enough

"Just Trust US" Is No Longer Enough

"We believe that our elections are accurate, but we need hard evidence to show the public."

By Bill Bradbury, Oregon Secretary of State

July 10, 2006

This speech was delivered to the Oregon Association of Counties on November 17, 2005. It is reposted here with permission of the author.

snip

We are seeing proposals that are costly and complicated to prove that an election is as accurate as we say it is. I believe we are faced with a compelling public demand to do more than we're now doing to verify election results.

We cannot ignore our constituents. It's not enough anymore to simply tell them "just trust us."

We need to revisit our compromise, and look again at the best way to validate election results. Administrative recounts of selected precincts to verify election results would not only be appreciated by the public, it would also improve elections administration by allowing us to identify and fix systemic problems in vote counting before certification of the results.

We don't believe that there are systemic problems in vote counting, but we don't have the procedures to prove it.

We believe that our elections are accurate, but we need hard evidence to show the public.

snip

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1488&Itemid=113


Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x439596

[Wilms]

21. Voting Paper Trail Could Be On Ballot

Voting Paper Trail Could Be On Ballot

Jeremy Wallace

July 10. 2006

A Sarasota group has collected enough signatures to put a referendum on the ballot that, if passed, would require a voter-verified paper trail for all computerized voting machines.

Patricia Rounds, a spokeswoman for the Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections, said the group has met its requirement to get 12,030 signatures to get the measure on the November ballot. Sarasota Supervisor of Elections Kathy Dent has already validated the signatures, clearing the path for the issue to get on the ballot.

In 2000, Sarasota County spent $4.7 million on sleek new computerized voting machines from Election Systems & Software, a Nebraska firm. But since buying them, Dent has faced frequent criticism from Democratic groups who say the computers can't be trusted. In 2004, the group pushed the Sarasota County Commission to force a paper record to be added to the machines. The five-member panel refused.

The ballot item isn't a done deal, yet. The group still needs to get the county commission to certify the proposed ballot language.

snip

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060710/COLUMNIST89/607100367


Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x439598

[Wilms]

22. Catherine Crier to Cover Busby/Bilbray, Clint Curtis, NH PhoneJamming 7/11

Brad on 'Ring of Fire' with RFK Jr. & Mike Papantonio

On Busby/Bilbray, Diebold, California and Democrats Fears of Fighting for Electoral Integrity…

ALSO: Catherine Crier to Cover Busby/Bilbray, Clint Curtis, NH Phone-Jamming Tomorrow Night!

BY Brad

7/10/2006

snip

Forgot to add, reliable sources tell me that Catherine Crier of CourtTV's Crier Live — who filed an extraordinary video editorial recently on the dangers of E-Voting — will be covering Busby/Bilbray, Clint Curtis and the NH/White House Phone-Jamming convictions tomorrow night (Tuesday) at 5pm ET/PT!

snip/audio to 'Ring of Fire' with RFK Jr.

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3051


Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x439600

[Wilms]

23. John Conyers Appearing on NPR Tomorrow to Discuss Election Reform

Appearing on NPR Tomorrow to Discuss Election Reform

by JC on 07.10.06 @ 09:40 PM ET

If you have a chance, listen into to NPR tomorrow. I'm on at 9:30 AM ET to discuss my report "What Went Wrong in Ohio" and all the recent developments concerning our nation's election system.

I am planning to devote considerable additonal time and effort to this issue in the future. Every day and week, we learn of new developments that make our citizens question the fairness and integrity of our election system.

We must never have another Florida or Ohio debacle, and I intend to do everything in my power to stand up for our citizens' right to vote.

snip

http://www.conyersblog.us/archives/00000498.htm


Discussion

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x439508

[Peace Patriot]

24. Laurel wreaths to Autorank, Hero and Patriot!

Thanks so much for all this great info--especially the bit about Calderon's brother writing the voting machine software by which they stole the Mexican election! There may be one positive to this story--we don't have to feel so ashamed any more about being the worst democracy on earth. Mexican elections are rivaling ours for putting illegitimate fascists in power!

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

A note on Hillary: Take a gander at this Associated Press passive language: "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, viewed as Democrats' presidential front-runner..." Viewed as? By whom? But despite this crap--and the two of them playing footsie with the junta--I gotta hand it to Hillary. I was looking into the history of the "Help America Vote For Bush Act" of 2002--the handiwork of the biggest crooks in the Anthrax Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney, and their pal, Christopher Dodd. Arguably the worst, most destructive legislation in American history. Created this frigging disaster with Bushite corporations "counting" all our votes with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code! Anyhow, I guess our Democratic representatives in the Senate were inhaling a bit too much around the mail room, cuz they all voted for it. All but two. Surprise, surprise! Only two US Dem Senators voted against HAVA: Hillary Clinton, and Charles Schumer! Go figure. That girl's got a whole lot of strikes against her, in my book. Hundreds. But, goddamn, she voted against HAVA! Doesn't that beat all!


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

A note about the "mainstream media"! Ple-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-ease STOP CALLING THEM THAT! They couldn't be more NON-mainstream! We give up that ground to them every time we use the phrase. We empower them. We legitimize them. We contribute to their brainwashing. (It slipped into one of the posts upthread. To me, it's gotten to be like somebody scraping fingernails on a blackboard. I can't stand it!)

[freedomfries]

26. K & R

[Ghost Dog]

27. Yup. k&r.

[kpete]

30. ALLRIGHT!!!

good stuff...

[autorank]

31. Muchos Gracias...

The people are becoming restless, all over the continent...

[mod mom]

32. OH: Cleveland Plain Dealer "2004 Election: stolen or not?"

Cleveland Plain Dealer:

2004 election: stolen or not?


National Democratic pols stumping in Ohio are finding themselves in a tight spot when it comes to describing Ohio's 2004 election.

How do you characterize the serious problems in the Buckeye State during the last presidential election without joining up with those who insist the election was stolen?

John Edwards toed that very line on Sunday during a press conference following his remarks to the national ACORN convention in Columbus. Asked whether President Bush won Ohio in 2004 fair and square, Edwards hemmed and hawed.

"There were irregularities in Ohio that were very troublesome," Edwards said. "I don't think it's possible to know, on the facts that we presently have, whether there would have been a different result."

<SNIP>
http://www.cleveland.com/weblogs/openers/index.ssf?/mtlogs/cleve_openers/archives/2006_07.html#159633

[lala_rawraw]

35. shite!!

[Pooka Fey]

36. K&R

[AtomicKitten]

37. K&R

[katinmn]

40. K&N Mass election fraud in Mexico!