How American Elections Became a Criminal Enterprise ( Don't miss this one)

[Guest guest]

(Go to the site below for pictures, charts, links and larger print)

 

_http://www.hermes-press.com/criminal_vote2.htm_

(http://www.hermes-press.com/criminal_vote2.htm)

 

How American Elections Became a Criminal Enterprise

 

Part Two

 

By

 

Michelle Mairesse

 

 

In 2004, the first news about the presidential election was reassuring.

Mainstream reporters, apparently sending their dispatches from lunar outposts,

said the election had gone smoothly. Earth-dwellers experienced a very different

reality. From coast to coast, came complaints of voter intimidation, erratic

machines, and crazy numbers. The morning after the 2004 presidential

election was eerily similar to the morning after the 2000 presidential

election. All

the well-founded predictions that George W. Bush would lose went out the

window, and he was once again, by some sleight-of-hand, installed in the office

previously awarded to him by the Supreme Court. Something was seriously

wrong. There were questions, not all of them from Democrats, but the American

press ignored them.

 

 

What Had Happened? Dissenters, subjected to the usual " get over it " routine,

had to go to the International Press Service for a hearing. Ralph Nader

described radical Republican tactics to the IPS, " What they 'do' is minorities,

and make sure that there aren't enough voting machines for the minority areas.

They have to wait in line ... for hours, and most of them don't. There are

all kinds of ways, and that's why I was quoted as saying, 'this election was

hijacked from A to Z.' "

 

Harvey Wasserman, author and lecturer, told the International Press Service,

 

" As far as I'm concerned, this election was clearly stolen. What they did in

Ohio was systematically deny thousands of African Americans, and other

suspected Democrats, the vote.

 

" It was like Mississippi in the fifties, and it was deliberate ... had there

been enough (voting) machines, and had people equal access to the polls with

a reliable vote count, there is no doubt that John Kerry would have carried

Ohio. "

 

There was evidence to support Wasserman's claim, and then some. Not only

were African-Americans often targeted, but many Democrats attempting to register

were undermined by a pecuiarly sinister program. A Republican consulting

firm, Voters Outreach of America, is headed by Nathan Sproul, formerly head of

the Arizona Republican Party and Arizona Christian Coalition. The Voters

Outreach program, which conducted registration drives in Florida, Michigan,

Minnesota, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia, was accused of

ripping and

discarding Democratic registrations. Former employee Eric Russell retrieved

ballots from the trash and offered them to the FBI as evidence. Presumably,

the FBI is still investigating.

 

Critics in Oregon charged the same company with using the same tactics, but

in Oregon the firm called itself America Votes, which is actually the name of

a non-partisan organization. The Republican National Committee acknowledges

that it hired Voters Outreach of America to register voters, stating that it

had zero tolerance for any kind of fraud. No formal severing of ties to

Sproul's Voters Outreach Program, though. (Two months after the election they

were

still paying Sproul.) No apologies to the thousands of people who were

cheated of their right to vote and were unaware of their disenfranchisement

until

they arrived at their polling place.

 

Outright Vote Fraud

 

Gradually, news about the not-so-smooth election seeped into the American

press. The November 14, 2004 Cleveland Plain Dealer reported a voter hearing

where, for three hours, voters offered sworn testimony about election day voter

suppression and irregularities.

 

A Washington Post article (December 15, 2004) reported dissatisfaction

across Ohio.

 

" The foul-ups appeared particularly acute in Democratic-leaning districts,

according to interviews with voters, poll workers, election observers and

election board and party officials, as well as an examination of precinct voting

patterns in several cities.

 

In Cleveland, poll workers apparently gave faulty instructions to voters

that led to the disqualification of thousands of provisional ballots and

misdirected several hundred votes to third-party candidates. In Youngstown, 25

electronic machines transferred an unknown number of votes for Sen. John F.

Kerry

(D-Mass.) to the Bush column. "

 

" In Columbus, Cincinnati and Toledo, and on college campuses, election

officials allocated far too few voting machines to busy precincts, with the

result

that voters stood on line as long as 10 hours--many leaving without voting.

Some longtime voters discovered their registrations had been purged. "

 

The Post reported that there had been protest marches and demands for a

recount.

 

" After the election, local political activists seeking a recount, analyzed

how Franklin County officials distributed voting machines. They found that 27

of the 30 wards with the most machines per registered voter showed majorities

for Bush. At the other end of the spectrum, 6 of the 7 wards with the fewest

machines delivered large margins for Kerry. "

 

In New Mexico, Hispanic voters were frequently given provisional ballots

that never made the count.

 

In North Carolina, machine malfunctions occurred throughout the day. They

doubled votes and subtracted votes. In Carteret County, over 4500 votes were

irretrievably lost.

 

In Pennsylvania, inner-city voters and college students waited hours to

vote. For them, there was a shortage of machines and even of ballots.

 

In New Jersey, the Newark Star-Ledger reported, " Hundreds, perhaps

thousands, of new voters at Rutgers University reluctantly filled out paper

provisional ballots or walked away from the polls when their names could not be

found

at polling locations. "

 

Many more instances of sleazy and sometimes fraudulent tactics could be

cited, and unless Americans wake up, the whole nightmare scenario will repeat in

2006 and 2008. As Mark Crispin Miller declares in his book Fooled Again: How

the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the Next One Too,

 

" the Republican Party did whatever it could do, throughout the nation and

the world, to cut the Kerry vote and pad the Bush vote. Some of the methods were

exceedingly sophisticated, like the various cyber-scams pulled off in a

tight complicity with Diebold, ES & S, Sequoia, Triad and other corporate vendors

of electoral infrastructure. Other methods were more bureaucratic: the

disappearance of innumerable Democratic registration forms, countless absentee

ballots and provisional ballots, as well as multitudes of would-be 'felonies'

never committed or committed by somebody else, or for no given reason

whatsoever.

 

" There were vast logistical inequities in state after state. Democratic

precincts got far too few machines, and those machines kept breaking down, or

turning Kerry votes into Bush votes, with long, long lines of would-be voters

stuck for hours (or, as often happened, giving up and not voting); while

pro-Bush precincts tended to have plenty of machines, all working well, so that

voting there was quick and easy. And then there were old-fashioned dirty tricks

meant to scare people into staying home, or to send them to the wrong address,

or to get them out to vote a day too late. There was also outright bullying,

intimidation and harassment--the oldest methods of mass disenfranchisement,

just as obvious in 2004 as they were in Dixie after Reconstruction, only now

such methods were used nationwide (and the U.S. federal government, in this

case, was behind them). "

 

The preparations for chaos began before the election:

 

In April, 2005 Marion County Clerk Doris Anne Sadler revealed that Election

Systems and Software, known as ES & S, which sold Marion County, Florida its

voting system, installed illegal software before the November 2004 election.

 

In the late hours of July 2, 2004, persons unknown entered the offices of an

Akron consulting firm for the Democratic Party and stole only two computers

containing campaign related information. In October, a similar burglary

occurred in the Lucas County Democratic Headquarters in Toledo. Only three

computers containing sensitive campaign information were selected from an array

of

appliances and a cash box.

 

In Franklin County, Ohio, the Republican Party paid expenses for a group

calling themselves " the Mighty Texas Strike Force. " They were tasked to

intimidate Democratic voters by phone and in person. Bands of them harassed and

threatened Democrats on Election Day. " (Shades of the berserkers unleashed in

Florida in 2000.)

 

Some swing state precincts (Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and

Iowa) saw long lines of minority voters and college students waiting for

scarce or malfunctioning machines. (There were only 3 machines per 1400 people

at

some locations in Ohio.) An estimated one-third of them dropped out of line

without voting. On December 20, 2004, Scripps Howard News Service reported

that a review of election results in a ten-county sampling revealed that more

than 12,000 ballots failed to record a vote for president, almost one in every

ten ballots cast.

 

In Warren County, Republican operatives said a Homeland Security alert

forced them to shut down the vote count, which they then removed to an

unapproved,

unsecured warehouse to count in secret. The FBI denied that any alert had

been issued. The official Warren County tally gave Bush a third of his winning

margin in Ohio.

 

 

The most vehement voter complaints concerned the tendency of some machines

to switch their vote from Kerry to Bush. In Ohio's Mahoning County, election

officials confirm that at least eighteen machines visibly shifted votes from

Kerry to Bush throughout the day. Some voters tried repeatedly to have the

machine verify their vote for Kerry, without success. Voters from Franklin

County declared under oath that their vote for Kerry faded away and could not be

retrieved. County canvassers attributed these malfunctions to computer

" glitches, " but when a computer consistently favors one candidate, a

pre-inserted

program, not a glitch, is responsible.

 

The Center of Republican Vote Fraud: Ohio

 

To repeat: elections were anything but smooth in Ohio.

 

In their detailed and documented How the GOP Stole America's 2004 Election &

Is Rigging 2008, (published in 2005), Bob Fritakis & Harvey Wasserman

describe the extraordinary circumstances surrounding the 2004 Ohio election. " In

the lead-up to the 2004 elections, numerous and independent non-governmental

organizations requested permission from Ohio election officials to gain access

to polling stations for routine observation and monitoring, as in Iraq and

Ukraine.

 

" These requests were uniformly rejected. Without public explanation, Ohio

Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell [who simultaneously chaired the

Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio] refused all requests from non-partisan national

and

international organizations to establish impartial observation and monitoring

procedures during the Ohio 2004 election.

 

" Co-author and El Salvador election observer Bob Fitrakis was personally

present in a meeting in which Matt Damschroder, former chair of the Franklin

County Republican Party and Director of the Franklin County (Columbus) Board of

Elections, denied international monitoring groups the right to observe the

Ohio elections. Among other things, Damschroder warned that if they set foot

within 100 feet of polling places in Franklin County, he would have them

arrested.

 

" Throughout the rest of the world, such an edict would be viewed as an

admission of intent to steal an election. The United Nations and other election

protection organizations would see Ohio's actions as the core definition of

renegade dictatorship. The Bush administration made it clear in Ukraine that

such behavior would not be tolerated.

 

" With the denial of access to international monitors, Ohio's 2004 election

would generally be considered a 'demonstration election,' a meaningless show

for a repressive regime. By international standards, it had no more credibility

in the eyes of history or the world than one in Castro's Cuba, the former

Soviet Union or any of scores of dictatorships where elections, presidential

and otherwise, are mere window dressings, with a predetermined outcome and an

electorate deprived of its rights.

 

" After Ohio's election, in further violation of internationally accepted

procedure, and of American election law, Blackwell ordered that all tally sheets

and other crucial documents pertaining to the presidential vote be locked

down. As we write, public access to those records is still being denied. "

 

 

Despite press complacency and self-congratulations of election officials,

the situation in Florida was rough, not smooth. Staffers of the emergency

hotline for the Kerry Campaign Headquarters in Broward County from late October

through the 2004 election took calls from voters whose complaints sound

suspiciously like those of Ohio voters.

 

On November 7, 2004 they reported:

 

" Many of the calls to our hotline were from voters who had pressed the

'Kerry' button on their electronic voting screen, only to have 'Bush' light up

as

the candidate they had chosen. In some cases, this would happen repeatedly

until about the 5th or 6th time the voter pressed 'Kerry' and eventually his

name would light up. In other cases, the voters pushed 'Kerry' but were later

asked to confirm their 'Bush' vote.

 

" We had calls about a road block, put up by the police at 7am on November 2,

which blocked road access to two precinct locations in majority black

districts. There was no justification for the road block -- no accident or crime

scene or construction. "

 

 

" We spoke with hundreds of voters who were certain they had registered to

vote in the past 6 months, well before the October 18 deadline, but were not on

the rolls. And those were just the people who had the information to contact

us.

 

" The local paper, citing the Supervisor of Elections office as its source,

told all people voting by absentee ballot that they could turn in ballots by

hand to any of its seven offices by 5pm on Tuesday, November 2. Every single

one of those offices except one was closed on Tuesday. "

 

" All of these problems do not even take into account the 58,000 absentee

ballots that had been 'lost' by the Supervisor of Elections, in perhaps the most

Democratic county in the state, disenfranchising thousands of people who were

disabled, out of the country, or elderly and unable get to the polls. These

events, and many others, have been documented and also reported to lawyers,

but we fear they will not get the attention they deserve. This is what we wit

nessed in just one county. We believe that these 'voting irregularities' raise

serious concerns about the legitimacy of the results in Florida, and more

broadly, about the health of democracy in this country. "

 

 

_www.legitgov.org_ (http://www.legitgov.org/)

 

 

 

A Repeat of the 2000 Florida Vote Fraud

 

Sam Parry

 

was also disturbed by the Florida count.On November 9, 2004, he wrote:

 

 

" George W. Bush's vote tallies, especially in the key state of Florida, are

so statistically stunning that they border on the unbelievable.

 

" While it's extraordinary for a candidate to get a vote total that exceeds

his party's registration in any voting jurisdiction - because of non-voters -

Bush racked up more votes than registered Republicans in 47 out of 67 counties

in Florida. In 15 of those counties, his vote total more than doubled the

number of registered Republicans and in four counties, Bush more than tripled

the number.

 

" Statewide, Bush earned about 20,000 more votes than registered Republicans.

 

The exit polls show Bush winning about 14% of the Democratic votes statewide

and losing

 

Independent voters to Kerry by a 57% to 41% margin. "

 

So where did all those extra votes come from? Were the exit polls wrong? Did

Democrats and Independents lie to the exit pollsters?

 

The Astounding Significance of the Exit Polls

 

 

 

Up until about 12:30 a.m. immediately following Election Day, all the

standard polls showed that John Kerry would win the presidency by around one and

a

half million votes.

 

Consultants Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International had been hired

to conduct exit polls for the National Election Pool, a consortium of the

nation's five major broadcasters and the Associated Press. Edison/Mitofsky

released the results of their large, nation-wide exit polls to their clients at

4

p.m. Election Day. Their data indicated that Kerry would win by 3%.

 

Exit pollers ask people emerging from the polling station how they actually

voted. Before the tallying is complete, an exit poll sampling accurately

indicates what the final vote count will be. Exit polls are so accurate that the

variation between the final vote count and the sampling is plus or minus one

tenth of one percent. To the consternation of Edison/Mitofsky, the discrepancy

between the presidential exit polls and the final published vote tally was

far beyond the margin for error, over two points. A two percent variation

between exit polls and final tallies is simply mind-boggling to statisticians.

Whenever such a variation occurs anywhere else in the world (say, Latin-America

or Ukraine), election watchers immediately declare the vote count

fraudulent.

 

When Edison/Mitofsky, the pollsters of record, and the other pollsters

confronted the startling disparity, a strange thing happened. Rather than

declare

the vote tally corrupted, the other pollsters said it was their exit polls

that were flawed, but refused to release their raw data for public inspection.

Looking for some kind of pattern to explain the " failure " of the exit polls,

the pollsters proposed that Bush supporters voted later in the day, after the

exit poll results were in; that pollsters were unable to access some polling

stations; that women voters were over-represented in the sampling; and that

Kerry voters were more amenable to completing the poll questionnaire than

Bush voters.

 

That last wistful rationalization sounds rather desperate, doesn't it.

 

To date, not a single one of these rationalizations is supported by any

credible evidence.

 

A pattern does emerge from the first exit poll numbers, those released

before the final vote tally was posted, those that were not " corrected for

sampling errors " . The pattern that emerges shows up in thirty-three of the

fifty-one

voting jurisdictions. In those thirty-three states, no matter who won, we

find a big variation between six early exit polls and the final count. In every

case, there is a 4% or 5% swing in Bush's favor in the final count. This

swing shows up in all the close states, in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Minnesota,

New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. With the

exception of Wisconsin, discrepancies between exit polls and final vote counts

all

went in Bush's favor. (Exit polls showed Kerry winning by .4% in Wisconsin,

which he did.)

 

In " The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy, " A Research Report from the

University of Pennsylvania (December 29, 2004), Dr. Steven F. Freeman says the

discrepancy between exit poll and vote tally is an anomaly even if one considers

only the battleground states of Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. " The

likelihood of any two of these statistical anomalies occurring together is on

the

order of one-in-a-million. The odds against all three occurring together are

250 million to one. "

 

In July 2005, the University of Illinois at Chicago's Institute of

Government and Public Affairs Professor Ron Baiman and eleven colleagues from

other

universities issued a disturbing in-depth statistical study of the exit poll

and final tally variance. Their methods and conclusions have withstood intense

scrutiny.

 

Here is the unvarnished truth about the 2004 election from Professor

Baiman's report: " There have been several methods to estimate the probability

that

the national exit polls would be as different as they were from the national

popular vote by random chance. These estimates range from one in 1,240 to one

in 16.5 million. No matter how one calculates it, the discrepancy cannot be

attributed to chance. "

 

The executive summary concludes that, " the many anecdotal reports of voting

irregularities create a context in which the possibility that the overall vote

count was substantially corrupted must be taken seriously. "

 

On November 5, 2004, Michael Keefer of Global Research approached the

variance from another direction:

 

" One can surmise that instructions of two sorts were issued. The

election-massagers working for Diebold, ES & S (Election Systems & Software) and

the other

suppliers of black-box voting machines may have been told to go easy on

their manipulations of back-door 'Democrat-Delete' software: mere victory was

what the Bush campaign wanted, not an implausible landslide. And the number

crunchers at the National Election Pool may have been asked to fix up those

awkward exit polls.

 

" But how do we know the fix was in? Because the exit poll data also included

the total number of respondents. At 9:00 p.m. EST, this number was well over

13,000; by 1:36 a.m. EST on November 3 it had risen by less than 3 percent,

to a final total of 13,531 respondents-but with a corresponding swing of 5

percent from Kerry to Bush in voters' reports of their choices. Given the

increase in respondents, a swing of this size is a mathematical impossibility. "

 

Steve Freeman and Josh Mitteldorf's article " A Corrupted Election: Despite

What You May Have Heard, the Exit Polls Were Right " (February 15, 2005)

concludes:

 

" The exit polls themselves are a strong indicator of a corrupted election.

Moreover, the exit poll discrepancy must be interpreted in the context of more

than 100,000 officially logged reports of irregularities during Election Day

2004. For many Americans, if not most, mass-scale fraud in a U.S.

presidential election is an unthinkable possibility. But taken together, the

allegations, the subsequently documented irregularities, systematic

vulnerabilities, and

implausible numbers suggest a coherent story of fraud and deceit. "

 

 

GAO Confirms Voting Machine Risks

 

Immediately after Bush was proclaimed the winner of the 2004 election, the

U.S. House Judiciary Committee received more than 57,000 complaints of

irregularities and outright fraud. Many of the complainants presented their

testimony under oath as sworn statements and affidavits in public hearings and

investigations conducted by the Free Press and other voters' rights

organizations.

In Ohio and elsewhere, many of the complaints centered on the erratic pe

rformance of electronic voting machines.

 

Senior Judiciary Committee Democrat John Conyers, a strong supporter of

voters' rights, asked the General Accountability Office to investigate

electronic

voting machines as used in the November 2, 2004 presidential election.

 

 

On October 20, 2005, the scrupulously nonpartisan Government Accountability

Office released a 107-page report on the reliability and security of voting

machines. Listed on the front page are the key findings of the report:

 

GAO Report Results in Brief

 

" While electronic voting systems hold promise for a more accurate and

efficient election process, numerous entities have raised concerns about their

security and reliability, citing instances of weak security controls, system

design flaws, inadequate system version control, inadequate security testing,

incorrect system configuration, poor security management, and vague or

incomplete voting system standards, among other issues. For example, studies

found (1)

some electronic voting systems did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit

logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected; (2) it was

possible to alter the files that define how a ballot looks and works so that the

votes for one candidate could be recorded for a different candidate; and (3)

vendors installed uncertified versions of voting systemsoftware at the local

level. It is important to note that many of the reported concerns were drawn

from specific system makes and models or from a specific jurisdiction's

election, and that there is a lack of consensus among election officials and

other experts on the pervasiveness of the concerns. Nevertheless, some of these

concerns were reported to have caused local problems in federal

elections-resulting in the loss or miscount of votes-and therefore merit

attention. "

 

This document confirms our worst fears about voting machines. They are

hackable, fragile, unreliable, and unworthy of our trust. There is more, much

more, in the report. Problems looming on the horizon haven't even been addressed

yet. One nightmare scenario: standards for federal and state voting machine

certification could take years to formulate and might be unenforceable at the

local level.

 

There is no longer any excuse for fatuous politicians to call election

reform advocates conspiracy theorists. The evidence is in. Read it. Act on it.

Take back our right to cast a straightforward vote and have it count.

 

Why should a functioning democracy allow private companies to conduct its

elections?

 

The seemingly generous offer of the federal Help America Vote Act (HAVA) to

purchase the machines for the states is only fairy gold. Thebill for care,

maintenance, security, inspection, certification, and replacement will be paid

by the states. For the manufacturers and purveyors, voting machines are a cash

cow to be milked in perpetuity. The continual battle against partisan tricks

will create whole cadres of computer police--who themselves will need to be

policed. At any stage of the process, ballots can vanish without a trace,

and, within limits, can be created without a trace. (Such limits include

reporting more votes than there are voters in a precinct, a report that

surfaced

more than once in 2004.)

 

A machine with a paper trail is no better. Machines can be programmed to

register a vote for candidate X while issuing a paper receipt for candidate Y.

Machines with paper rolls and printers are even worse, creating yet another way

for machines to malfunction.

 

Real Reform

 

Here is a solution to our voting problems: Federally mandate a printed paper

ballot in a standardized format. No more butterfly ballots. No more hanging

chads. No more electronic willies. These pencil-marked ballots must be

hand-counted in plain view of press and public. This is the way the French, the

Germans, the Japanese, the Canadians and other civilized democracies vote. Civil

servants count the ballots in the presence of representatives of all the

political parties on the ballot. If the counting takes a week, no one is

agitated. The results of the exit polls, never more than a tenth of a percent

off,

have already determined the winners.

 

Optical scanners will not be used to count the vote. They are susceptible to

hacking, and if the count is challenged, they are always bypassed in favor of

the slower but more accurate public hand count.

 

Civil servants can certify the custodial trail of paper ballots and can be

held responsible for them.

 

Civil servants should register voters and maintain voter rolls. Every

registering citizen will be issued a receipt or copy that will be recognized in

the

appropriate precinct. Secretaries of state and other partisan officials

should have no role in the entire election process. They can be and have been

bought, both in the initial vote and in the recount process.

 

Recounts will be conducted by civil servants in the same fashion as the

general election.

 

Civil servants should maintain a bureau to process all provisional ballots

and mailed ballots.

 

Election fraud should be a federal crime subject to severe penalties.

 

 

Call to Action

 

We, the people, must insist on reform. We can expect nothing of our corrupt

and spineless political masters. To all appearances, the press is content to

sleep through the apocalypse. Today, this very day, is the time for all of us

who care about our repressed democracy to speak out, organize, and be heard

above the din of propaganda and commerce. Work for reform by November.

 

__________

 

An easy National Action:

Go to

_http://www.congressweb.com/cweb4/index.cfm?orgcode=VTUSA & hotissue=1_

(http://www.congressweb.com/cweb4/index.cfm?orgcode=VTUSA & hotissue=1)

 

to support passing HR 550 as written.

 

 

 

A from letter (or your own) will tell Congress that all America wants open

and fair elections with voter verified paper records and a meaningful audit.

 

You can go to _http://www.icountcoalition.org/notsponsor.html_

(http://www.icountcoalition.org/notsponsor.html) to find out which

representatives are not

sponsors.

____________

 

 

To learn more watch " Invisible Ballots " _http://www.invisibleballots.com/_

(http://www.invisibleballots.com/)

Joan Brunwasser _rafijoan_ (rafijoan)

will lend you copies, she has a lending project going . Showing it to a group

would help others to become aware of this issue.

 

 

I have been told these can be purchased from Oped News by voting rights

activist groups for $7 or possibly free if you explain a good reason.

Write _rob_ (rob)

 

 

Or watch Votergate online _http://www.votergate.tv/_

(http://www.votergate.tv/)

 

 

 

 

Also watch _Clint Curtis Interview_

(http://www.lionsgrip.com/voting2004curtisinterview.html)

 

 

In December, 2004, Computer Programmer Clinton Curtis issued a sworn

affidavit that he had been asked by Tom Feeney to create a program that would

control the vote in south Florida. Shortly thereafter, he was interviewed on

Air

America Radio, and following that, was interviewed by several U.S.

Congresspeople before the U.S. House Democratic Judiciary Committee, which is

available

in video format online. He explains to the Committee just how this type of

vote count manipulation is accomplished. Read the full, verbatim transcript of

this sworn testimony here.

_http://www.lionsgrip.com/voting2004curtisinterview.html_

(http://www.lionsgrip.com/voting2004curtisinterview.html)

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

For PA residents, go to: _http://www.votepa.us/_ (http://www.votepa.us/)

 

_____________

Here is a Move-on action:

 

Meet with members of Congress this April in D.C. or locally. Click here to

sign up:

_http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1531_ (http://www.moveon.org/r?r=1531)

 

____________

 

Part one of this article

_http://www.hermes-press.com/criminal_vote.htm_

(http://www.hermes-press.com/criminal_vote.htm)

 

 

References to get in your local library:

 

References: These books will guide you through the maze.

 

Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the

Next One Too, by Mark Crispin Miller

 

What Went Wrong In Ohio: The Conyers Report On The 2004 Presidential

Election, by Anita Miller, Gore Vidal (Introduction)

 

Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen?: Exit Polls, Election Fraud, and

the Official Count, by Steve Freeman & Joel Bleifuss

 

Did George W. Bush Steal America's 2004 Election? by Bob Fitrakis, Steve

Rosenfeld, Harvey Wasserman

 

How the GOP Stole America's Election & Is Rigging 2008, by Bob Firtakis and

Harvey Wasserman