Another section on elections (and more)

I'm grateful for the response on my email conundrum (although I remain allergic to Macs -- sorry!). I do wish that all virus-writers had but one neck, so I could wring it.

By the way, have any conspiracy theorists mooted the idea that Symantic and allied companies are the real creators of the many viral attacks in the wild? Cui bono, and all that...

Feeneygate. Each day, this drama becomes more interesting. YEI, the former employer of Clinton Curtis (the guy in Florida who claims Tom Feeney asked the company to create a prototype vote-rigging software) is now also making serious lawsuit noises against the Seminole Chronicle, the Florida paper which gave coverage to Curtis' story. According to Brad Friedman, the letter from YEI's attorneys bears striking similarities of language to the letter written by Feeney's representatives.

Not that they're working together, or anything like that...

The lawyers also allege "at least one of Mr. Curtis’s former employers has stated under oath that Mr. Curtis is a pathological liar." Odd that this former employer goes unnamed. Someone at YEI, perhaps?

To my nostrils, these legal missives carry the stench of the bluff.

Olbermann. In a private email, a reader made a good case in defense of Keith Olbermann's recent work. Unfortunately, I was asked to keep the letter private. Suffice it to say, I now somewhat regret my harsh stance of yesterday. Somewhat.

The Ohio lawsuit. Remember the affidavits testifying to highly-suspicious behavior on the part of that Triad employee? Chief Justice Moyer tossed 'em out today, even though the events in question were (to a large degree) verified.

The reasons for this dismissal were largely technical. Moyer claims that the affidavit by Sherole Eaton relies on hearsay. (I would question this; I thought Eaton was careful to specify what she witnessed personally.) He also argued that her affidavit lacks a statement from the notary that he or she personally witnessed Eaton's signature. Moreover, the Chief Justice makes clear that even if the affidavit were unassailable, it remains "unclear" that the Triad employee engaged in ballot tampering.

Much the same objection is lodged against the deposition of Catherine Buchanan. First, we get technical objections: "Neither the exhibit nor the contestors' motion, however, specifies who Buchanan is, where she works..." Then we get to the meat of the matter:

Buchanan testifies that an employee was going to reprogram a machine. Even assuming the specified machine was an electronic voting machine that was used in the presidential election, however, there is no evidence in the deposition excerpt concerning how this would necessarily affect the recount -- or more important -- this election-contest case.

Dig it: It's not enough for a tech to get access to a voting machine under legally dubious circumstances. It's not enough for him to reprogram a machine that should not be reprogrammed (an activity some churls might consider downright illegal). It's not enough for him to utter those incriminating remarks about a "cheat sheet," which surely speak to the integrity of the recount process.

No, Moyer won't allow evidence in unless the Triad guy had announced in plain language: "Hi, everyone! I'm here to help George W. Bush cheat his way to victory in the recount!"

And even if Eaton had heard the guy say those words, the judge would still toss out her affidavit if the notary public failed to state specifically that he or she saw her sign the damn piece of paper.

The Chief Justice also sees no particular need for emergency relief to preserve evidence in Ohio despite the fact that "Tabulator test deck reports were discarded after the election."

The case is still ongoing -- but will the evidence remain intact? Or will we continue to read about those pesky accidents?

Open letter to John Kerry. Bob Fertik has just written an open letter to Kerry, asking the Massachusetts senator to challenge Ohio's electors on January 6. As you know, I have long been a Kerry supporter. Yet I remain of two minds as to whether he should lead the fight on January 6. Fertik makes some points worth repeating here:

But Monday night, your attorney Dan Hoffheimer told Keith Olbermann your investigation is over:

"There are many conspiracy theorists opining these days. There are many allegations of fraud. But this presidential election is over. The Bush-Cheney ticket has won. The Kerry-Edwards campaign has found no conspiracy and no fraud in Ohio, though there have been many irregularities that cry out to be fixed for future elections. Senator Kerry and we in Ohio intend to fix them. When all of the problems in Ohio are added together, however bad they are, they do not add up to a victory for Kerry-Edwards. Senator Kerry's fully-informed and extremely careful assessment the day after the election and before he conceded remains accurate today, notwithstanding all the details we have since learned."

I beg to differ with Dan Hoffheimer. Let me address two issues:

1) When do "many irregularities" (Hoffheimer's own phrase) rise to the level of "fraud" and ultimately "conspiracy"?

2) How much fraud would it take to "add up to a victory for Kerry-Edwards"?

1) When do "many irregularities" (Hoffheimer's own phrase) rise to the level of "fraud" and ultimately "conspiracy"?

"Irregularities" happen by accident or neglect. "Fraud" happens by design, when someone intends to interfere with a free and fair election. "Conspiracy" happens by coordination among those intending to commit "fraud."

The first challenge is proving the "many irregularities" were not accidental, but were intentional "fraud."

Later, we read:

Now what about Ohio in 2004?

A large group of detectives are painstakingly examining evidence and interviewing witnesses. As in all difficult criminal investigations, key discoveries are being made in fits and starts, and key questions are being highlighted. I have documented all of the key discoveries on one page: http://democrats.com/ohio

Have we found the "smoking gun"? Not yet. But we have made many important discoveries that suggest the "many irregularities" were outright "fraud." And we are close to uncovering a "conspiracy," which seems ever more likely because of Secretary of State Ken Blackwell's fierce effort to block any investigation whatsoever.

The Republican effort to steal Ohio's electors began long before Election Day, and continues to this very moment.

Later still:

On October 13, thieves broke into Democratic headquarters in Toledo and stole computers with crucial data - while ignoring office cash. In 1972, a similar campaign break-in at the DNC headquarters at the Watergate Hotel in Washington DC - which President Richard Nixon brushed off as a "third rate burglary" - ultimately led his resignation when the conspiracy behind the break-in - and the conspiracy to cover it up - were fully exposed after a year of bi-partisan hearings.

Later still:

In the week before Election Day, Democrats received flyers telling them to vote on Wednesday. Cleveland Democrats were visited by canvassers who illegally offered to collect and deliver completed absentee ballots to the election office, and got phone calls incorrectly informing them that their polling place had changed. Lake County voters received a memo on bogus Board of Elections letterhead informing voters who registered through Democratic and NACCP drives that they could not vote. A 25-man Republican-backed "Texas Strike Force" in Columbus threatened ex-convicts not to vote.

Fertik goes on to detail many similar attempts at disenfranchisement. He then summarizes subsequent developments, familiar to all regular readers of this column:

As polls closed on Election Day, the National Election Pool's exit poll showed Kerry winning Ohio by 3.2%. Two polling experts, Steven Freeman and Ron Baiman, independently concluded the chances of the exit poll being so different from the "official" results are "impossible." Those polling experts - and Rep. John Conyers - asked the NEP to release the raw data, but they have adamantly refused.

On Election Night, officials in Warren County - which alone produced 35% of Bush's margin of "victory" - cited a bogus "homeland security" warning to prevent the media and the public from observing the vote count.

In Miami County, officials mysteriously added 19,000 votes to their original tally. Several precincts reported nearly 100% turnout; a recent canvass by the Free Press found many voters did not actually vote.

A comparison of the Presidential race with the Ohio Supreme Court race found C. Ellen Connally, a black woman from northeastern Ohio, did far better than John Kerry in southwestern Ohio suburbs. This unlikely result is a key element of the Green/Libertarian contest - and possible evidence of "vote-flipping" software in the voting machines or tabulating systems.

Rep. John Conyers and other dedicated Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have held several hearings in Washington DC and in Ohio. They have examined dozens of fraud allegations and sought answers to 36 specific questions from Ken Blackwell. Blackwell replied with utter contempt. This lack of transparency and accountability alone is sufficient to justify a challenge to Ohio's electors on January 6.

Fertik then goes on to outline recount oddities:

By law, each county is required to chose precincts (totaling 3% of the vote) at random for the recount. But in 86 of 88 counties, officials chose the precincts in advance, giving tabulating vendors the opportunity to rig the recount.

Recount observers were prohibited from examining the 92,672 "spoiled" ballots (undervotes and overvotes) that were rejected by vote-counting machines. As the Florida recount proved, many of these "spoiled" ballots were in fact "valid" ballots cast on defective machines in poor precincts, and the failure to count them most likely hurt John Kerry, as Dr. Richard Hayes Phillips has documented.

Recount observers were mostly prohibited from inspecting sign-in books to compare the number of votes cast with the number counted (see Miami County above). On November 15, in violation of Ohio's open public records laws, Blackwell ordered all 88 Boards of Election to prohibit any public inspection of poll books until after certification. When the ban was lifted in Trumbull County, Dr. Werner Lange found 580 absentee votes for which there were no absentee voters identified in the poll books - a major fraud. If extrapolated state-wide, there could be 62,513 fraudulent absentees. In Perry County, the number of voters exceeded the number of people who signed the books in at least 11 of 46 precincts.

There is much more, of course. Much of the argument depends on exit polls, and the Ukrainian comparison.

I agree with Fertik's points; we all must salute his superb work. But one factor troubles me: Obviously, the Republican party should suffer politically from the outrages listed above. But they will suffer nothing, for the mainstream media will not repeat the list of charges given above, even if Kerry proclaims himself an aggrieved party.

If Kerry challenges the electors, Kerry -- not Bush -- will suffer politically.

On the other hand: If Kerry does not challenge the electors, he will suffer politically within his party. The Democratic faithful -- which is to say, the many small contributors -- will view John Kerry as someone who would not stand up for himself.

However he stands, he stands damned.

What can change the situation? A political miracle. We need a striking new piece of evidence. It need not be conclusive, but it must grab attention. And we need this evidence within a week.