ELECTION NIGHT 04-REPUBLICANS Had Computer Capacity, Software Skills & Elec Infrastructure IN PLACE!

[kpete]

April 23, 2007 at 19:15:59

The GOP's cyber election hit squad

by Steven Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis Page 1 of 3 page(s)

http://www.opednews.com




April 22, 2007

Did the most powerful Republicans in America have the computer capacity, software skills and electronic infrastructure in place on Election Night 2004 to tamper with the Ohio results to ensure George W. Bush's re-election?

The answer appears to be yes. There is more than ample documentation to show that on Election Night 2004, Ohio's "official" Secretary of State website – which gave the world the presidential election results – was redirected from an Ohio government server to a group of servers that contain scores of Republican web sites, including the secret White House e-mail accounts that have emerged in the scandal surrounding Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’s firing of eight federal prosecutors.

..............

On Election Night 2004, the Republican Party not only controlled the vote-counting process in Ohio, the final presidential swing state, through a secretary of state who was a co-chair of the Bush campaign, but it also controlled the technology that allowed the tally of the vote in Ohio's 88 counties to be reported to the media and voters.

...........

What's clear ... is the highest ranks of the Republican Party's political wing, including White House counselor Karl Rove, a handful of the party's most tech-savvy computer gurus and the former Republican Ohio Secretary of State, created, owned and operated the vote-counting system that reported George W. Bush's re-election to the presidency. Moreover, it appears the votes that gave Bush his 118,775-vote margin of victory – the boost from Ohio's countryside – have yet to be confirmed as accurate. Instead, the reporting to date suggests that what happened on the ground and across Ohio's rural precincts is at odds with the vote tally released on Election Night.

more at:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_steven_r_070423_the_gop_s_cyber_elec.htm

[SharonAnn]

1. Thank you for posting this. It's a great article and I've saved it for reference.

[L. Coyote]

29. GET REAL: Steven Rosenfeld and Bob Fitrakis as "coincidence theorists"

CAREFUL is certainly an appropriate warning before reading this one.

FIRST, before going into all the falsehoods promulgated by the article, here is where the authors ought to focus--there is direct evidence of vote-switching. Why did these authers distract from that evidence in 2004, with the recount focus, and why do they continue to both ignore the evidence and focus attention elsewhere. They were wrong then, and they are wrong now. Here is the evidence they should focus on:

The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes
http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html

======================

Their article posts a question and does not even answer in the affirmative. Why, because they are WRONG!

"Did the most powerful Republicans in America have the computer capacity, software skills and electronic infrastructure in place on Election Night 2004 to tamper with the Ohio results to ensure George W. Bush's re-election?"

"The answer appears to be yes."

SO WHAT? Appearances mean nothing. These authors are ignoring real evidence in favor of distracting from it.

Let's discus the FACTS instead.

"... on Election Night 2004, Ohio's "official" Secretary of State website -- which gave the world the presidential election results -- was redirected from an Ohio government server to a group of servers that contain scores of Republican web sites,

on Election Night 2004, Ohio's "official" Secretary of State website -- which gave the world the presidential election results -- was redirected from an Ohio government server to a group of servers that contain scores of Republican web sites, ...."

WRONG: The Ohio SoS utilized a hosting service for their election night posting of results. It is not a coincidence that the GOP uses the same "hosting" service, but it is WRONG to infer that the State of Ohio was not directing the election results site w/o evidence beyond a coincidence.

WRONG: "On Election Night 2004, the Republican Party not only controlled the vote-counting process in Ohio, ..."

The vote counting/reporting was controlled by government entities at a county level as usual. The SoS only reports what is reported to that Ohio government office. In no way, shape, or form does the SoS count votes.

WRONG: "... the Republican Party ... also controlled the technology."

The vote counting technology was controlled by the State of Ohio and the counties.

WRONG: "...Privatizing elections and allowing known partisans to run a key presidential vote count ..."

The election was conducted by the county BOEs, not private, and counted by these government organizations. This rhetoric is both false and inflammatory. Why?

WRONG: "there is abundant evidence that Republicans could have used this computing network to delay announcing the winner of Ohio's 2004 election while tinkering with the results."

Now we also have "could have theorists" too!! How does that move anything forward except confusion?

WRONG: "On Election Night 2004, many of the totals reported by the Secretary of State were based on local precinct results that were impossible...."

The election night results gave Bush a substantial margin. Citing several precincts, a la Reagan's anecdotal logic, is now a tired old verse, discredited soon after the election, and proves nothing of substance even when true. A good analogy is Republicans using "voter fraud" to advance a different agenda.

WRONG: "... the facts are not in, but enough is known to warrant a serious congressional inquiry."

Not on this issue. The serious congressional inquiries underway since 2004 do not need to be misdirected by "coincidence theorists." The have real evidence to persue.

WRONG: "... for roughly 90 minutes the Ohio election results reported on the Secretary of State's website were frozen .... vote totals from these last-to-report counties ... were highly improbable and suggested vote count fraud to pad Bush's numbers."

"Improbable." "Suggested." Don't attorneys know how valueless such "proofs" are? Vote counts are always frozen on web sites, then a new result total is posted and they change. Bush was winning Florida in 2000, and the results moved Gore forward to a tie, for all practical purposes. The same fallacious logic would indicate Gore stole the last reporting counties in Florida.

WRONG: "... The most eyebrow-raising example to emerge from parsing precinct results was finding 10,500 people in three Ohio's 'Bible Belt' counties who voted to re-elect Bush and voted in favor of gay marriage, if the official results are true ... in Warren, Butler and Clermont Counties. The most plausible explanation for this anomaly ... was Kerry votes were flipped to Bush while the rest of the ballot was left alone. While we have some theories about how that might have been done by hand in a police-guarded warehouse, could full Republican control of the vote-counting software and servers also have played a role?"

This is easy to explain. These authors know of a plausible explanation and ignore it, as if part of the cover-up themselves. What happens when punch card ballots are switched between precincts with different ballot orders. Kerry votes can be switched to Bush votes while a distinct outcome may or may not result for other, down-ticket races with a different number of options. Warren and Butler Counties used punch cards, and Clermont used optical scanning, so all the ballots are still preserved.

WRONG: "Baiman compared the number of voters who signed in with the total number of votes attributed to precincts. He found hundreds of "phantom" votes, where the number of voter signatures was less than the reported vote total. That discrepancy also suggests vote count fraud."

This is a common problem when voters do not sign in, a well known problem with a well known cause. It does not suggest fraud in and of itself. This is iase argumentation.

WRONG: "... the highest ranks of the Republican Party's political wing, including White House counselor Karl Rove, a handful of the party's most tech-savvy computer gurus and the former Republican Ohio Secretary of State, created, owned and operated the vote-counting system that reported George W. Bush's re-election to the presidency."

This is just beyond ridiculous. Only those with no critical reasoning will not see the lie in this statement.

Laws of the State of Ohio created the system, the People of Ohio own it, and Boards of Election operated it. GET REAL!!

[truedelphi]

30. Thank you for this analysis n/t

[cally]

2. It's weird to see our speculation proven true

K&R

[yardwork]

16. It was more than speculation even at the time.

I watched it unfold. I read about it in Representative Conyers's report. I know what they did.

[Botany]

3. Tom Delay, 1/6/05 "So do these people think that Karl Rove was flipping ....

..... votes on a couple of computers in the White House on Election Night?"

Rough Quote from the Challenge to certify the Vote in House.

[tom_paine]

7. Yes we DO think that. And Tom DeLay is a projecting piece of shit

Like listening to Capone say, "I'd like to see anyone PROVE I had anything to do we these murders. I mean, it's not like I hired guys to dress up like Chicago Cops who lined the guys up against the wall before cutting them in two with tommy guns."

I hate these fucking monsters & tyrants.

[mod mom]

37. I dion't know Botany, you think Ms Ralston might need a subpoena?

or perhaps Kenny boy Blackwell, he's a devout Christian. I'm sure he would tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, right?

[L. Coyote]

46. The votes were switched before they were counted, and they knew it. PROOF

The focus should be on how Ohio Kerry votes were switched to Bush votes before their tabulation.
The focus on Rove doing his job detracts from the vote-switching. Which is just what they want it to do!!!

The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes

http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html

DU: OHIO 2004: 6.15% Kerry-Bush vote-switch found in probability study
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x259620

[tridim]

4. 5 million emails are MISSING

I guess this is the plan that they're hiding.

Can you imagine what will happen to Rove and the rest of BushCo when these emails are subpoenaed? Whoa! Hold on to your hats. This is "GET OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE NOW!" material.

[file83]

41. How do we know emails are "missing"? I mean, if an email is gone, how do you ever prove it

existed in the first place?

Don't get me wrong, I know these bastards are guilty as sin, but it's just a question coming from curiosity.

[lonestarnot]

42. And 8 and 1/2 billion dollars!

[glengarry]

5. The Final Ohio Exit Poll (like the Final National EP) was adjusted to match a corrupt recorded vote

Kerry won the 12:22am Ohio Exit Poll (1963 respondents): 52.1-47.9%
Bush "won" the adjusted 2:06pm Final (2020 respondents): 50.9-48.6%
That was quite a feat considering there were 57 additional respondents. Was it an example of divine exit poll fundamentalism?

2004/2006 Election Fraud Analytics Reference
http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQResponse.htm#Ohio

Ohio Exit Poll Analysis

Note the vote share anomalies between the 12:22am exit poll (1963 respondents) and the 2:06pm Final (2020 respondents). Just like in the Final NEP, vote shares changed abruptly and uniformly by 3% in favor of Bush.


1) Party ID: Democrat/ Republican 38/35 to 35/40, a 7.9% (3/38) shift.With the original 38/35 weights, Bush needed 17% of Democrats to match the recorded vote. He had 8%.

2) Ideology: Liberal/Conservative 21/32 to 19/34, a 9.5% (2/21) shift. With the original weights, Bush needed 23% of Liberals to match the recorded vote. He had 13%.

3) Senate race: Democrat/Republican 43/57 to 36/64, a 16.3% (7/43) shift. With the original weights, Bush needed 14% of those who voted for the Democratic senator. He had 7%.

4) First-time voters: Of the 14% who were first-timers 55% were for Kerry. Are we to believe that Kerry only won 47% of previous voters?

5) When Decided: Of the 21% who decided in the 30 days prior to the election, 62% voted for Kerry. Are we to believe that he only won 45% of the other 79%?

What pre-election poll had Bush leading in Ohio by 10 points prior to Oct 1?

[Cobalt Violet]

6. Can they do it again in 2008?

It appears they have gotten away with this treason.

[loudsue]

8. They WILL do it again, unless we ATTACK our county & state governments

between now & then, and INSIST they take our voting tabulators OFF LINE, and make sure that all LEGAL votes are cast on paper ballots.

There really isn't much time left to clean up the election process before the 2008 election. Rove is going to have the media spinning like a top, saying that "the people aren't holding bush's unpopularity against the republican candidates".... so they can justify the republican-won seats once they've stolen them.

:kick::kick::kick:

[GreenTea]

10. The Dems better do something before 2008 - Paper Ballots!

Many still Dems believe there is no problem becasue the took back congress, but still many seats were stolen in various states by republicans in 2006, the republicans losses would of been far worst.

[ThatsMyBarack]

18. That worries me a lot!

:scared:

[Kurovski]

9. Oh boy, I sure didn't appreciate all the crap I got in '04

for saying the election was fucked. And I thought it was pretty obviously stolen back then.

Thanks for posting this. I feel just a wee bit saner today.

[EFerrari]

12. I'm still waiting for that investigative reporting the NYTs promised us.

lol

:hi:

[Kurovski]

14. The consortium in 2000 found that Gore won that election,

even if the headlines pulled a "bait and switch."

I think the NYTs actually was one of two national newspapers that had a fairly clear headline when the newspaper consortium report came out.

But I'm not remembering it so clearly that anyone should qoute me on that.

What I'm saying is, I plead a Gonzo!

:hi: :loveya:

Edit: maybe the NYTs is waiting till after 2008 when investigative journalism might be less risky to life and limb? :shrug: :D

[EFerrari]

22. Remember after 2004, the NYT said it would investigate OH

if there was a story there? We send them a brazilion emails and the Public Editor put the promise in writing. I guess that check has timed out. :shrug:

[Up2Late]

11. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not seeing much new here, but here a link to a little research...

...we did here a few days ago. Maybe some of the data and links will be helpful: <http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3213737&mesg_id=3213737>

[Kurovski]

15. Say, that's a nice link you gots there, Up2Late.

Thanks.

[SpiralHawk]

13. republicons hate America and democracy

They are lacking in all honor.

More proof.

[blm]

17. Why didn't the Ohio Dem party and DNC have monitors or countermeasures in place

to beat back these maneuvers?

Democratic voters and candidates were promised after 2000 that the DNC's Office of Voetr Integrity would work to counter GOP election fraud.

How did it manage to get worse in 2002 and 2004?

[Blackhatjack]

19. IF the truth ever comes out, ROVE will be the MOST HATED man in modern US History...

I am sorry, but if the proof comes out and if these people are not publicly reviled and firewalled from ever having a say again in the existing Republican Party, then YES ... the existing Republican Party needs to be fully investigated, exposed and sanctioned.

We cannot have criminals using the existing Republican Party to destroy our Democracy.

[loudsue]

21. They won't be reviled -- they OWN the media.

I REALLY wish the Dems would do something about that while they have the "investigative branch" thingy going for them. The media is supposed to be our 4th estate. But it happens to be 90% owned by 6 HUGE corporations, each of which are the republican money machines.

:kick::kick::kick:

[Blackhatjack]

24. Being 'most hated' has nothing to do with the MSM, but you are right about MSM...n/t

[blm]

26. The corpmedia protects BushInc where it can until a story is UNSPINNABLE - like

a category 5 hurricane that absolutely could NOT be spun for BushInc in the early days. The mediawhores were practically having a meltdown.

[Kurovski]

20. Kick. (nt)

[jsamuel]

23. in case you haven't seen, here are screen shots of Ohio website on Election night 2004

which we now know was run by the same network as the RNC. Numbers were changing between candidates.

[thereismore]

31. how am I supposed to see that numbers were changing between

candidates? Help please.

[jsamuel]

32. Kerry - 0, Bush 1000, COBB - 4000 ??? Cobb had less than that many votes for the whole state.

Cobb was obviously being assigned Kerry's votes. Also see where Kerry and Cobb had the same exact vote totals in the 35,000's. These errors then "corrected themselves" later that night. Cobb ended up with less than 2000 votes for the whole state, let alone that county.

[thereismore]

33. Oh yeah. Just a computer glitch. You know, computers make glitches,

never people who programmed them. :mad:

[NewYorkerfromMass]

36. Wow this is weird

And its shades of Gahanna, Ohio where Bush got 3000 more votes than was mathematically possible.

[mod mom]

38. IrDA ports a possibility?

A dangerous port on the Diebold touch screen!!

This from TrueVoteMD: Diebold AccuVote TS electronic voting machines have an infrared (IrDA) port installed. This is a remote communication port through which another remote device could communicate with the touch screen and change either its data or its software or both.
If your county uses Diebold touch screens, let your county officials and election judges know that it is crucial to cover the IR port with opaque tape.
The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) --- who works with the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to develop and recommend guidelines for electronic voting machines --- issued a similar warning about the Infrared ports on voting machines in a report which warned "The use of short range optical wireless," like infrared, "particularly on Election Day should not be allowed."

As mentioned, since touch-screen machines have been stored at poll workers' houses and other unsecured locations prior to Election Day, and since data can be transferred to the machines and their memory cards via Infrared --- even without removing the cards or breaking their protective seals --- the IrDA ports would seem to be a tremendous concern.

The NIST report discusses such concerns and some of the troubling security issues with IrDA protocols:

How Secure is IrDA

IrDA does not provide encryption at the Physical Layer, and depends on the end systems to implement security if any.
...
With optical, it is possible for a session to be ‘hijacked’ unless strong authentication measures are implemented between communicating systems. When a session is hijacked, a foreign device masquerades as a trusted system that is authorized to exchange data. Because the system has no way to distinguish the masquerader from the authorized system, it will accept anything from it as if was authorized.

-snip
http://www.bradblog.com/Index.php?m=200602&paged=2

[gauguin57]

25. When is this going to hit the MSM?

Cuz until it does, no one will do SQUAT about it.

[tmlanders]

27. This is so sad...

The last 2 1/2 years could have been so different

[bleever]

28. The truth will be known.

People who knew this election was stolen (:hi: everybody!) have gone from being tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists (banned from dKos), to the standard bearers for what is rapidly becoming a highly plausible theory, on the way to being proved right.

DU ERD folks: :yourock:

[wordpix]

34. just another reason to IMPEACH the whole cabal. Grrr.

:grr: :mad:

[mnhtnbb]

35. See the documentary "Commander 'N Thief" and judge for yourself

Mark Crispin Miller was among the first to get the information out
through his book "Fooled Again: How the Right Stole the 2004 Election & Why They'll Steal the Next One Too (Unless We Stop Them".

For those who prefer information in a video format, I recently viewed
the documentary "Commander 'N Thief".

http://www.commander-n-thief.com/


There is ample evidence that the 2004 election was stolen, as was
the 2000 election. The Dems had better wake up and do something about
it before 2008 rolls around.

[In Truth We Trust]

39. Hand Counted Paper Ballots NOW! Nothing more and Nothing less! nt

[ClayZ]

40. K and R... Bookmarked! Thanks!

[ladym55]

43. Two things I know ...

Ohio now has a Democrat as Secretary of State, Jennifer Brunner, and she has all the ballots from 2004. They weren't destroyed as much as Kenny wanted them to be. The Attorney General is ALSO a Democrat. An article I read recently said they were investigating 2004.

And Jennifer Brunner DUMPED the entire BOE in Cuyahoga County, including the County Chairman of the Republican Party. At least one county is minus its partisan incompetents.

I feel more hopeful about a fair election in Ohio in 2008.

[L. Coyote]

45. The State of Ohio is still investigating 2004 irregularities

and they are in litigation, sued by the authors publishing these "coincidence theories" coincidentally (or not so).

There may be a monetary issue in all this. Who stands to gain what from the litigation?

Unfortunately for the new Democratic officials in Ohio, they now are placed in a position of defending the State for the actions of Ken Blackwell.

There is more to this issue than meets the eye, and the roles of the players have various dimensions not in the articles.

[diva77]

44. Los Angeles County central tabulators are in rooms with internet

connectivity. Citizens have come up against intimidating treatment and a cloak of secrecy when trying to get straight answers regarding the equipment used to record and tabulate elections results in LA County.