Powerful Government Accountability Office report confirms key 2004 stolen election fi

[Makalakumu]

Concerns? Yes. Alarm? No.

Enough to investigate when the findings are compared to the allegations? Yes.

I know for a while about this report, but it took me a while to read it. Also, if you have time, you should read Conyer's Congressional Report...the one that was presented during the Jan 5th 2005 challenge of the election results. Comparing the two is very important for our democracy IMHO.

 

[modarnis]

And then there are people like Bev Harris who video taped election officials changing votes in Bush's favor...

And these tapes are available for viewing where? CNN; MSNBC; REUTERs? or maybe the impartial Blackboxvoting.org?

 

[modarnis]

First of all, the GAO didn't say what you allege they said...if they had, you wouldn't have tried to cut and paste the GAO findings with the rantings found on other websites so they looked as if they were part of the same report.

Secondly, those so-called "experts" were doing nothing but engaging in the same kind of political opportunism that you are engaging in now. "Statistics"? Hardly. I've been around enough self-proclaimed experts in courts to know that everyone isn't the expert they claim, and much of what comes out of their mouths is tailor made to fit an agenda. Sell it somewhere else.

Try page 58 of the GAO report for their actual conclusions

 

[Phoenix44]

Again, all of the above listed "facts" come from websites who have distorted, manipulated and outright made up those "facts". I always find it interesting whenever someone lists a series of alleged "facts", which are alleged to prove "something". Upon close examination, they are a sleight of hand trick, a mere smoke and mirrors trick. I have found that to be the case with those alleged "facts".

WRONG.

Frankly, I got tired of listening to Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio say, "Look for yourself. If you look hard enough, you'll see it!"

So I did. And you can do it too. I went to the raw data. The electoral results. The party registration. Population and demographics. It took hours, but lo and behold, I DID see it.

The Dem:Repub voting pattern was clearly "flipped" in Belmont County OH, and Baker County FL. In precincts all over Cuyahoga County OH, there WERE more ballots counted than registered voters.

So I'd suggest that, instead of just dismissing the opinions of everyone who disagrees with you as "distorted, manipulated and outright made up," you do the math yourself. It's a lot more objective than displaying a long list of websites.

 

[sgtmac_46]

WRONG.

Frankly, I got tired of listening to Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio say, "Look for yourself. If you look hard enough, you'll see it!"

So I did. And you can do it too. I went to the raw data. The electoral results. The party registration. Population and demographics. It took hours, but lo and behold, I DID see it.

The Dem:Repub voting pattern was clearly "flipped" in Belmont County OH, and Baker County FL. In precincts all over Cuyahoga County OH, there WERE more ballots counted than registered voters.

So I'd suggest that, instead of just dismissing the opinions of everyone who disagrees with you as "distorted, manipulated and outright made up," you do the math yourself. It's a lot more objective than displaying a long list of websites.

And you found this "facts" on what bogus website recommended by Air America?

Those folks operate on the principle "If you say a lie enough times, it must be true".

 

[sgtmac_46]

It confirmed that the allegations were possible.



So thousands of people purjured themselves in some grand scheme to cast down Bush? Now that is a conspiracy! Sounds like someone needs tin hat... :asian:

And I love this quote from President Bush, it applies here...

"I don't care about the numbers, I know the facts..."

The bottom line is that people made these allegations under oath before congress. We have to assume they are true unless we are given some concrete reason to believe that they are false and that they committed a crime...purjury. The GAO report confirms that it was entirely possible for the alleged incidents to have occured. We need to investigate further in order to ascertain if someone actually tampered with the election results. Statistically, this is the only viable explanation for the discrepincies and I believe that there is concrete evidence that shows that crimes were committed...Bev Harris' video tape and comments actions from certain individuals.

That's funny, because your claim is that thousands of Republicans, with careers and families and freedom and much more to lose engaged in a vast conspiracy to "steal" the election, all of which is far more serious than simply charging them with perjury.

Yet, you think it's "implausable" that "thousands" of nut jobs (The idea that it was "thousands" appearing before congress is an asinine assertion anyway.....signing a petition is not "appearing") and fruit cakes (with nothing else to do) crawled out of the sewer spouting conspiracy theories for the purposes of rigging an election themselves? pffft.

As for your "numbers"themselves, they are cooked numbers, not facts, but rather the fevered imaginings of self-described "experts" off their medication. The work of cheap magicians who feel they've accomplished credibility by sheer volume of crap.

I'll direct everyone's attention to another kook conspiracy theory sweeping the internet...That is the theory that 9/11 was a government conspiracy and that the World Trade Center was brought down by explosives, not by the planes. These sites quote VAST data by (self-proclaimed) scientists and experts "proving" this allegation. It just goes to show what someone can invent given free time and computer access...they can make any asinine claim "look" real (that is if someone is stupid enough to buy the premise). What's more, "legitimate" sources researching the topic can't avoid being influenced by the sheer volume of "evidence" on the internet that was simply invented.

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?ChannelID=89

You'll note the "mountain" of "scientific" evidence presented to prove THIS kook theory. They even quote "anonymous" government agents and former government agents....lol

Again, some folks spend so much time on the internet, that they start to think all of it's real. They believe because they find a volume of websites quoting alleged "facts" to support their position, that they aren't simply made up or distortions of reality. They never question why ALL those websites refer to back to a small set of "sources". What's furthermore, they never question the obviously biased and radical nature of some of the site operator's, who sit in their basement, and crank out one (left and right wing) conspiracy theory after another. Then, they use EACH OTHER's conspiracy fanatasy as MORE evidence of their own nutty theories. I love the internet, it's so much more interesting than reality. That's why folks have to be cautious with the internet....it is very difficult to varify or debunk even the most ludicrous assertions.

The bottom line is, however, that the left in this country doesn't care if the elections were rigged or not...they will SAY they were rigged as long as they keep losing. Reality doesn't matter, it's all perception. Convince people they are being disinfranchised, whether it's true or not. It's never been about the truth with the left. It's always been about arousing passion.

"There is no objective truth, but that which serves the party".
"A lie told often enough, becomes the truth"
"We need the real, nation wide terror which reinvigorates the country and through which the Great French Revolution achieved glory"
"The way to crush the bourgeoise is to grind them between the millstone of taxation and inflation"
"There are no morals in politics; there is only experience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel"
"The press should be not only a collective propagandist and a collective agitator, but a collective organizer of the masses"
Vladimir Lenin


And just for good measure...

"The collapse of the global marketplace would be a traumatic event with unimaginable consequences. Yet I find it easier to imagine than the continuation of the present regime."
George Soros, (financial speculator and profiteer) on Capitalism

 

[Makalakumu]

The GAO report shows that a very small amount of people could have influenced a national election with the system that we have in place. Not, thousands, a handful. Also, Phoenix44 has the right idea. You can get the numbers yourself and do the math. It's all part of the public record. Again, compare this GAO report with the congressional challenge and you'll see that they dovetail...it merits further investigation.

 

[sgtmac_46]

The GAO report shows that a very small amount of people could have influenced a national election with the system that we have in place. Not, thousands, a handful. Also, Phoenix44 has the right idea. You can get the numbers yourself and do the math. It's all part of the public record. Again, compare this GAO report with the congressional challenge and you'll see that they dovetail...it merits further investigation.

Where are you getting those "numbers" from again?

Also, why does it seem that, everywhere a democrat doesn't win, the election is "rigged"? I knew kids like that in school, too. I once knew a kid who swore that a video game was rigged and out to get him if he lost at it. Sometimes, folks, a loss is a loss.

 

[Makalakumu]

Sometimes, folks, a loss is a loss.

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf

I would agree, but these things happened...and these things change everything about what I think.

 

[Phoenix44]

No offense, sgtmac, but I don't have to do your homework for you. No, I did not go to a website recommended by Air America Radio, and Air America Radio didn't recommend any website. As upnorthkyosa pointed out, this information is public record. You can get demographics from the US Dept of Labor or the US Census. You can get party registration information from the state or local boards of election, or from the party. You can get electoral results from the same places, or from CNN or AP Newswire or Google or from your local newspaper. For all I care, you can get the election results from Fox News. Unless you're saying that there's such a conspiracy, that every single website, newpaper, library, government, and media outlet, including Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, is the product of liberal bias.

The raw data is there for anyone who wants to look at it, but it takes more time and thought than simply hurling epithets.

 

[Makalakumu]

Looks like Diebold is attempting to evade election transparency laws...

http://www.eff.org/Activism/E-voting/20051117_Diebold_v_NC_Motion.pdf

 

[JAMJTX]

"I can't believe that with today's technology, it's still possible to rig an election"

The technology makes it easier to rig an election.
it is hard to rig a national election at the voting booth. You need a lof of cooperation in multiple states to make sure you win electoral votes.

Most of the election fraud is done at local levels and is usually done through absentee ballots. Absentee ballots are easy to manipulate, and it's real simple to "find a misplaced box of ballots" during the recount. This one happens all the time.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

That's funny, because your claim is that thousands of Republicans, with careers and families and freedom and much more to lose engaged in a vast conspiracy to "steal" the election, all of which is far more serious than simply charging them with perjury.

Yet, you think it's "implausable" that "thousands" of nut jobs (The idea that it was "thousands" appearing before congress is an asinine assertion anyway.....signing a petition is not "appearing") and fruit cakes (with nothing else to do) crawled out of the sewer spouting conspiracy theories for the purposes of rigging an election themselves? pffft.

I haven't seen the GAO report, and consider any discussion of the 2004 elections a moot issue at this point, so I won't comment either way on that. I just want to ask why on one side you refer to careers and families and freedom, while the other side you refer to as nut jobs and fruit cakes crawling out of sewers. You assume anyone alleging fraud is a gutter-crawling fruitcake, while anyone who supported Bush was a values-laden family man. Or woman. Please attempt respect and not to rely entirely on polemic. Thank you.

 

[Makalakumu]

I haven't seen the GAO report, and consider any discussion of the 2004 elections a moot issue at this point, so I won't comment either way on that.

Why? If it happened in 2004, why couldn't the same happen in 2008? If you look at the court briefing I posted, it would seem as if Diebold is still trying to evade electrion transparency laws...

 

[sgtmac_46]

No offense, sgtmac, but I don't have to do your homework for you. No, I did not go to a website recommended by Air America Radio, and Air America Radio didn't recommend any website. As upnorthkyosa pointed out, this information is public record. You can get demographics from the US Dept of Labor or the US Census. You can get party registration information from the state or local boards of election, or from the party. You can get electoral results from the same places, or from CNN or AP Newswire or Google or from your local newspaper. For all I care, you can get the election results from Fox News. Unless you're saying that there's such a conspiracy, that every single website, newpaper, library, government, and media outlet, including Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, is the product of liberal bias.
The raw data is there for anyone who wants to look at it, but it takes more time and thought than simply hurling epithets.

Oh, so the Census bureau and bureau of Labor has the numbers that prove the election was rigged? Why didn't you SAY so?

It's the ole' "I could prove it, but that's not MY job, 'look it up'" argument. Works every time. It's based on the dubious assumption that 1) You're right and 2) Evidence exists, but you have no interest, intention (or ability) to provide and 3) It's there for the finding, if only someone will only look.

Sounds like you're pulling that one out of the air. What's furthermore, I find it humorous the assertion that Census statistics + Election results = EVIDENCE OF A RIGGED ELECTION....Unless, of course, someone forgot to take their Seroquel that day.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Why? If it happened in 2004, why couldn't the same happen in 2008? If you look at the court briefing I posted, it would seem as if Diebold is still trying to evade electrion transparency laws...

We'll just go to back to "Hanging Chads" so you can complain that THAT is rigged too...I've got a prediction...You'll claim any election that doesn't go your way...is rigged.

 

[sgtmac_46]

I haven't seen the GAO report, and consider any discussion of the 2004 elections a moot issue at this point, so I won't comment either way on that. I just want to ask why on one side you refer to careers and families and freedom, while the other side you refer to as nut jobs and fruit cakes crawling out of sewers. You assume anyone alleging fraud is a gutter-crawling fruitcake, while anyone who supported Bush was a values-laden family man. Or woman. Please attempt respect and not to rely entirely on polemic. Thank you.

I'm glad you asked. The first group of people, those that work at election sites, are people who DO have families and careers, and volunteer to do a civic service (i.e. aid in elections, election monitoring, setting up voting booths). They're, for the most part, honest folks, doing this because they feel it is an important role in a democracy.

The second group, on the other hand, are people who believe that the illuminati are taking over the world with the help of the anti-christ (George Bush) and his minion. They are also the same people ALWAYS claiming the system is rigged anytime they don't get their way, and they were predicting, BEFORE the election, that the only way they WOULDN'T WIN is if the election was rigged (and preparing to contest any election they disagreed with).

Now, I guess you might be willing to give each of those groups EQUAL credibility, but i've been around both enough to know that, just because the second group CLAIMS something, certainly doesn't mean it's true.

I'll end with a question...If a guy walked up to you on the street, and told you that he has PROOF that aliens are running the government. He says "all you have to do is 'look it up', man" and he even quoted some (vague, generalized) 'facts and statistics' that allegedly supported this, are you going to believe him without any evidence whatsoever, just because he said it? I'm certainly not.

By built in BS detector is pretty sensitive (much to many people's annoyance, i'm sure). On who's side does the burden of proof rest. I believe the burden of proof lies on the accuser, and they have far from met that burden.

 

[Makalakumu]

Tell me what YOU think of the GAO report...

 

[sgtmac_46]

Tell me what YOU think of the GAO report...

The purpose and goal of the report was to determine if current voting practices need to be improved to avoid, not only the possibility of voter fraud, but even the appearance and allegation of voter fraud. The GAO does what it's designed to do, examine a system and determine what could go wrong with it and determine how to improve it so it is more efficient and less susceptable to fraud and error.

It is a mistake of logic to believe that because the GAO outlines scenarios where a thing "Could happen" in the future, that it is evidence that it HAS happened. That's a logical fallacy in the same sense as assuming that because the GAO examined another government departments SOP and determined that it needs to be improved to prevent possible fraud that THAT report is evidence that fraud must have occurred. The GAO audits government entities and looks for problems, both real and theoretical.

Voter fraud is always a possibility. But just because fraud is possible in every election, does not MEAN that a large scale fraud OCCURRED that resulted in you losing the election. Don't believe me about the vague nature of the allegations. Here's what the GAO said:

"In conclusion, lack of specifics about allegations and actions limits
DOJ's ability to have accurate and clear information to share with the
public or Congress about the types of allegations received and actions
taken."

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi...e=d041041r.txt&directory=/diskb/wais/data/gao

What's more, in reference to your "thousands" of people complaining about irregularities, it's no surprise in view of the special interest group money (i.e. MoveOn.org, as just one example, and a cast of many others) who fish around for ANYONE who is willing to claim, not matter how dubious the claim, that some sort of fraud or disinfranchisment happened. They will take anyone, and I mean ANYONE's claim seriously and use them as "evidence" that it occurred. They will then use the sure number of allegations that they were able to generate as evidence of it's veracity (And allow them to avoid having to bring specific allegations and incidents which would, in turn, be easy to refute as the bogus charges they are). That's why all these allegations remain so "Vague".

Not, as in "Republican Agent <insert name here> committed voter fraud by doing <blank>" But, "Wide spread (vague) allegations of voter fraud abound (despite not one single verifiable incidence)" BS is still BS, I don't care how big the pile gets.

In short, what the GOA found was, instead of a large scale concerted effort to "defraud the American people" was a lot of small scale localized problems that were not caused by an particular political offiliation, but rather, the typical logalized budget and bureaucracy problems.

 

[Makalakumu]

In short, what the GOA found was, instead of a large scale concerted effort to "defraud the American people" was a lot of small scale localized problems that were not caused by an particular political offiliation, but rather, the typical logalized budget and bureaucracy problems.

Ok. Then why did every single reported e-vote machine error in every state across the nation favor our current president Bush?