Hitting the fan

So much is going on, and I have so little time to write! December 13 was the biggest day in the vote fraud story since November 2.

For a full transcript of David Cobb's address, go here. (We offered a partial transcript yesterday.) Cobb describes how a tech used an apparent ruse to get access to the voting tabulation machine stored within the Columbus Board of Elections -- before the recount could take place. This nameless tech said that the system had a "bad battery" and had "lost all its data."

Does that explanation make any sense to you? Every computer has a small battery -- that's what keeps the clock running when you pull the plug. But how can battery failure ruin the hard drive? Perhaps someone better-versed in the technology can fill in the gaps here.

More imporantly: Why is a man without a name allowed to have access to so vitally important a machine -- at that critical time? Should we not have, at the very least, a sign-in sheet? Perhaps some form of security check?

This disturbing event, coming on top of the Green County lockdown, provides obious evidence of election fraud. Why try to mislead the recounters if the original vote was clean?

The best report on the committee is still the one by Bob Fritakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman.

What would it take to win? Tom Flocco has a long report on the Conyers hearings. Flocco (predictably) scores Kerry, but he also notes the constitutional measure by which a state's electors can be challenge: One House member and one Senator must object. Last time, no senator would raise his voice. Now, one cannot help but wonder if John Kerry himself will do the honors. If he does -- and he would do so at great political risk -- both Houses would have to vote on whether to accept the state's electors.

Logic tells us that the Republicans would carry the day in such a vote. The outcome would be in doubt only if America were shocked by clear, unmistakable and well-publicized evidence of vote fraud. Perhaps nothing short of an on-the-record confession from a conspirator would suffice. (Think McCord in Watergate.) If we don't get a confession, recordings of an incriminating telephone conversation might do the trick. (Think Lewinski, or the Enron conspiracy to defraud California.)

Democracy depends on such a breakthrough.

Apology. Early on, I expressed contempt for the House Judiciary Committee's efforts. ALthough I have always considered Conyers a good man, I usually do not place much hope in congressional hearings. Many of them have been commandeered by the "bad guys;" even hearings chaired by Democrats tend to end up serving Republican interests. Think of Ollie North testifying during Iran-contra. Think of the HSCA, or the MKULTRA hearings chaired by Kennedy and Inouye. Think of the 9/11 investigations.

Conyers seems to be accomplishing the nearly-impossible: He is spearheading a congressional investigation into covert operations that actually uncovers important material. Perhaps the lack of media coverage aided his effort -- by flying under the radar, he avoided the enemy's artillery. (The counter-attack has finally started: Paul Weyrich published a piece recently damning Conyers as a "hard leftist.")

If I get a hat this Christmas, I'll have to doff it to many people -- most of all to John Conyers. (Please: No jokes about the material used to manufacture that hat.)

Finally: People for the American Way has produced a long, valuable document on voter disenfrachisement in 2004. The title: "Shattering the Myth." I don't think anyone can read ten consecutive pages of this piece without concluding that the Republicans made a systemic effort to keep the "wrong" people away from the ballot box.