Discussion is needed ....Olberman/Harris

[AmerDem]

I'm not sure at this point what is going on but something stinks to high hell on one side or the other. Olberman starts this by going out his way to slam Harris last night on Countdown. After he is crushed with endless emails he devotes his blog to rationalizing his decision. Bev follows up in her reply basically calling everything Olberman said a lie. We didn't expect any of this from either one but after hearing both sides so far I have to ask, why would Olberman go so far out his way and actually choose words that follow what the corporate news media having been saying to discredit the e-voting scandal and voter fraud? Why did he all at once single out Bev to pounce on? I'm not liking this at all.

Olberman...."I have not dealt with Ms. Harris directly, but my staff has, and though we have asked her on a regular basis to let us show these tapes on national television, she has declined."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240

Harris..."Contrary to Olberman's assertions, neither he nor his staff have EVER asked Harris to show anyone the Volusia County tapes. They have not asked Harris to come on the show since November 8. Harris did not come to Florida until November 12."

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

[TexasSissy]

1. Easily solved. She could produce the tapes. End of

controversy.

It sounds like a misunderstanding.

I believe that the the MSNBC staff would have asked for the tapes more than once. Why wouldn't they? It is the normal course of events to ask for those kinds of things.

Maybe Harris' helpers didn't tell her they'd asked.

In any case, all she has to do is produce copies of the tapes. That would have been more effective than a statement saying MSNBC had not asked for the tapes. I would have BOTH made that statement AND produced the tapes, unless there's some reason not to produce them, in which case I'd explain that thoroughly to the public.

I see nothing wrong with what Olbermann said, if what he said is true. And I believe it is.

[BevHarris]

8. Response

I believe that the the MSNBC staff would have asked for the tapes more than once. Why wouldn't they? It is the normal course of events to ask for those kinds of things.

They did not ask me nor any member of my staff. I just spoke with one of Olbermann's producers, Katy Carp, who said "we've tried to get in touch with you."

Any of you who tried to get in touch with me shortly after the election know that the voicemail was full. We did not receive any voicemails and never spoke with MSNBC.

Maybe Harris' helpers didn't tell her they'd asked.

Our "helpers" are me, Andy Stephenson, and Kathleen Wynne. None of us were called by MSNBC about Volusia.

In any case, all she has to do is produce copies of the tapes.

OK. Please go ask Greg Palast to produce all his investigative material during the middle of his investigations. See what HE says.

Also, please ask litigators to produce the evidence they are presenting at trial so you can put it on the Internet. They will tell you to go jump in the lake.

That would have been more effective than a statement saying MSNBC had not asked for the tapes.

The truth is, MSNBC never asked for the tapes.


I see nothing wrong with what Olbermann said, if what he said is true. And I believe it is.

What he said is not true. Provably so.

Thanks for playing, and we are delighted to know we are getting close to something sensitive. (harassment calls and bogus news stuff suddenly ramped up during the last 24 hours).

Bev Harris
Executive Director
Black Box Voting Inc.
http://www.blackboxvoting.org

[Village Idiot]

11. Those with clear heads are behind you, Bev.

Please please please please PLEASE keep up the good work.

[AmerDem]

17. Thanks Bev

When I first watch Olberman last night bring this all out I was taken back and kinda smelled a rat. It just didn't add up. Here we had Olberman as one of the few getting this story out then he puts out basically a hit piece on you, one of the best and few people who have been there to fight this from the beginning. The words he chose were so similar to what we would hear a Blitzer, Woodruff and the rest of the corporate news media that I knew something wasn't right.

[Killarney]

18. Why would Olbermann lie?

What's his motivation?

That's what I can't figure out.

[AmerDem]

28. Why would Olberman use wording

that every other corporate media talking head has used to discredit the e-voting scandal? Why would Olberman all at once choose to go after Bev as hard as he did last night? Did you watch Countdown last night? I did and I was taken back at how he went after her. It seemed so out of the expected.

A quick answer that immediately comes to my mind when you ask why he would lie...How about keeping his job or just perhaps someone talked with him and let it be known things can happen. Yes, it is a guess but after watching what has become of the our supposed unbiased news over the last few years I think it's anything is possible.

[Killarney]

29. You're talking about the guy that voluntarily left

his own job because of the lies about Clinton they wanted him to say on air. Left his own show because he refused to talk about Monica anymore.

This guy has integrity.

[AmerDem]

33. He has always shown integrity

and I'm very grateful we have someone like Olberman on our side but to compare corporate media today to what it was back in the Clinton era is like trying to compare an apple to an orange. Through out the year we here have talked openly about what is probably going on behind the scenes of these corporate news outlets. Anything is possible, anything. I suggest you read thru this thread for Bev's replies and ask yourself why anyone in her position ( she doesn't get paid for doing what she has done, she states here there is NO documentary in the works etc.) would have a reason to lie. It seems to me she would have loved the opportunity to get this message out whenever she could. Also, Olberman himself admits to canceling her. Why would he cancel someone so involved in the e-voting scandal as Bev?

[Rockerdem]

34. Bev - it is extremely important to patch things up immediately

Our cause and yours is not served by misunderstandings that could be easily resolved. All it does is create a fester for people of ill-will to exploit. Time is running out quickly. Please reassure the people here that support both you and Keith.

[in_cog_ni_to]

69. Thanks for posting Bev! Daaaaamn. I missed Olbermann last night

and got on DU this morning and SHIT HAD HIT THE FAN! I believe in you, Andy and Kathleen! :hug:

[Killarney]

2. I'm trying to figure it out.

One of them is obviously lying unless there is a huge miscommunication between them.

So... who has reason to lie?

Let's look at both sides.

Harris--it has been insinuated that perhaps she cares about her documentary/money more than the cause. If she had something on tape and released it to Olbermann, it would not be exclusive to her documentary. However, after Olbermann called her out on this by saying, "What Ms. Harris has left herself open to is a charge that as much as any interest she has in the justifiable public concern over our most precious right - the right to a reliable, honest election - she may also have an interest in making her own documentary, on her own schedule, for her own purposes." If she was invited on and refused and ask for the tape and refused, this hurts her reputation. So, she could be lying to save her reputation.

Olbermann--I'm still trying to figure out why he would lie and say he invited Harris when he didn't and say he asked for the tape when he didn't. No idea here.

[AmerDem]

6. I can't see a misunderstanding like this

but let's hope that's what it was. When i watched last night episode of Countdown I was taken back when Olberman brought this up. He didn't look comfortable talking about it. Time will tell I guess.

[BevHarris]

21. last response

One of them is obviously lying unless there is a huge miscommunication between them.

Harris--it has been insinuated that perhaps she cares about her documentary/money more than the cause.

We are not making a documentary.

If she had something on tape and released it to Olbermann, it would not be exclusive to her documentary.

We are not making a documentary.

However, after Olbermann called her out on this by saying, "What Ms. Harris has left herself open to is a charge that as much as any interest she has in the justifiable public concern over our most precious right - the right to a reliable, honest election - she may also have an interest in making her own documentary, on her own schedule, for her own purposes."

We are not making a documentary.

If she was invited on and refused and ask for the tape and refused, this hurts her reputation. So, she could be lying to save her reputation.

We were not invited on (except before we came to Florida, and both times Olbermann canceled).

Olbermann--I'm still trying to figure out why he would lie and say he invited Harris when he didn't and say he asked for the tape when he didn't.

I think a producer will get canned, and that perhaps this producer, who perhaps called and got "voicemail full" embellished her own work to make it sound like she'd done more than she had.

That's my guess. I do think it very odd that he went out on a limb over this, without checking his facts, and also, we have been fairly accessible by phone this week.

In fact, if we weren't accessible, how did we talk with NBC producers from both Palm Beach and Orlando three times yesterday? By the way, though I can't get to respond to all my messages, I do write them all down. It is easy to document that they never called or left messages, either for me, or for Andy or Kathleen.

Bev

[Lone_Star_Dem]

31. Thanks Bev

Much appreciated responses.

I still am not clear if you will be going on Olbermann or not, but time will tell.

Keep up the good work. :)

[rman]

25. Olbermann:

why he would lie

Olbermann -> MSNBC -> General Electric = Weapons Manufacturer = interested in having a president who likes war, just like the rest of the military-industrial-media complex.

can you say "propaganda model"? google it

[Killarney]

27. Oh for Christ's sake.

If that were the case, Olbermann wouldn't do half the stories he does every night.

[rman]

32. whatever stories he does, it hasn't had much effect.

such stories are harmless to the establishment as long as there aren't to many.
in fact these stories help maintain the media's credibility.
this is in fact part of the propaganda model.

[stellanoir]

3. this is a modified version of my post on another thread

I've admired Bev enormously for a very long time.

However Olberman is the only MSM dude offering any coverage whatsoever. Let's perhaps not be so quick to roast him.
We have no clue really, of the scheduling or corporate pressure he is operating under.

Bev has been moving heaven and earth since the election to expose the widespread fraud. She may have very grounded legal reasons to not divulge all her info so quickly.

I just fear that what was probably nothing more than a misunderstanding and scheduling conflict has been blown completely out of proportion and has caused many to make the fundamental mistake that dems often make. . .that is. . .of forming the circular firing squad all too quickly, and losing sight of what's really at stake.

A representative legislature is at stake. Election fraud fundamentally equals taxation without representation.

Maybe let's just be mindful of who is speaking the truth and dismiss what is really no more than a silly misunderstanding. There is so much at stake. Look at the broader picture guys.

If we don't fix this now, there won't be a free and fair and verifiable election again in a good (or not so good) long time.

[AmerDem]

9. I'm not in any way taking sides or

trying to smear either one of these people. Out of everyone out there these two people have taken the lead to get this story out. I just find it strange how Olberman, out of the blue went after Harris. I mean he surely knows the issues at hand and also knows the weight Bev carries in the entire e-voting scandal. You would think to avoid any misunderstanding and also to provide a lively show discussion he would have taken a more hands on approach in getting Bev on. Like I said something really stinks here and it just doesn't come off as a "silly misunderstanding" to me.

[BevHarris]

13. response

She may have very grounded legal reasons to not divulge all her info so quickly.

yup.

Maybe let's just be mindful of who is speaking the truth and dismiss what is really no more than a silly misunderstanding.

Not silly when you've worked for two years to establish credibility and the type of allegations made in the Olbermann editorial are very serious for anyone doing any type of journalism. He said we have repeatedly refused to show the tapes and that our behavior indicates we may be making up news.

That's pretty overt. The standard way to deal with this, in journalism, is to simply issue a correction.

Bev

[Village Idiot]

16. Just because

Olberman is the only mediawhore offering coverage does not make him any less of a whore. How much integrity could Olberman POSSIBLY HAVE? He works for NBC and has to follow NBC's priorities...

The guy's been on the case about what - three weeks??? As I see it, he has no larger stake in the issue than anyone else, and probably has several other irons in the fire. If he is told by his masters to drop the issue, he will drop it.

If it is in NBC's interest to have Olberman obfuscate the issue by discrediting Bev or BBV, then Olberman will obfuscate the issue by discrediting Bev or BBV. It's just that simple.

[Snivi Yllom]

20. also true

Olberman is a whore too.

[Trajan]

4. Chuckles ...

Swords unsheathed ...

Chain Mail fastened tight ...

Pour the Kerosene ....

Strike the match ....

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. Well, fighting about it sure is one way to bring the issue to light

-----------------------------------
Would Jesus love a liberal? You bet!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/

[Snivi Yllom]

7. one thing to note

BBV's message to KO today has been edited and the language changed.

the first statement

Black Box Voting demands retraction from Keith Olberman. We have given him the option to correct his factually flawed editorial by having Bev Harris come the on his show (contrary to his assertions, neither he nor his staff have EVER asked Harris to show anyone the Volusia County tapes. (One Olberman's producers did ask Harris to appear on the Countdown show, twice, both times BEFORE Harris came to Florida or uncovered Volusia County irregulaties. In both cases, after Harris had cleared her schedule to appear, right before the show, Olberman's producers canceled the appearance without explanation. Harris has always agreed to go on Olberman's show, and Olberman is the one who canceled, not Harris. The Volusia County tapes were showed to CNN cameramen, but Harris has never been asked to show any Volusia County materials to Olberman, MSNBC producers, NBC producers, CNBC producers, or anyone else with that TV network or its affiliates.

Also contrary to Olberman's claims, Harris is not making a documentary, but the makers of the Votergate documentary, an independent team who captured the Volusia County trash incident on film, are eager to interview Keith Olberman on camera to ask him why he produced this report.


later the statement was revised and released changing some of her claims:

Black Box Voting requests retraction from Keith Olberman, along with an explanation of why MSNBC alleged such an untruth. We have given Olberman the opportunity to correct his factually flawed editorial by having Bev Harris appear on his show. Contrary to Olberman's assertions, neither he nor his staff have EVER asked Harris to show anyone the Volusia County tapes. They have not asked Harris to come on the show since November 8. Harris did not come to Florida until November 12. Olberman's producers had asked Harris to appear on the Countdown show twice, on Nov. 5 and Nov. 8. Each time, after Harris cleared her schedule to appear and shortly before the show, Olberman's producers canceled the appearance without explanation. Harris showed the Volusia County tapes to CNN cameramen, but Harris has never been asked to show any Volusia County materials to any MSNBC producers, or NBC producers. The NBC local affiliate in Palm Beach County asked for the LePore videotape, which Harris promptly provided. The tapes, when showed without editing, show clearly that Olberman's report was not accurate about the LePore incident either. An edited version of the LePore tape was aired on both Orlando and Palm Beach County NBC affiliates last night.

Also contrary to Olberman's claims, Harris is not making a documentary, but the makers of the Votergate documentary, an independent team who captured the Volusia County trash incident on film, are eager to interview Keith Olberman on camera to ask him why he produced this report.

[AmerDem]

10. in what way?

can you explain? Thanks

[Walt Starr]

12. What exactly was changed?

Just curious.

[Snivi Yllom]

14. the edits are up now

see post 7 now.

[Walt Starr]

15. Thanks for showing the edits

Interesting. Incredibly interesting.

Is it, perhaps, an attempt to generate interest in a Bev Harris appearance on Countdown? A publicity stunt on the part of the Olberman crew, mayhaps?

Time will tell...

[Snivi Yllom]

19. dunno what to make of them

But I find the parsing of words and some backtracking on BBVs part to be disconcerting.

It will be interesting to see KOs response to this. IN any case, both are still slaiming the opposite regarding offering the Volusia tape. Both are still giving different stories regarding being invited back to the show since the first bumping.

and I still think Olberman is a mediawhore not to be trusted.

[Walt Starr]

23. Maybe Olberman should stick another post on his blog

An open invitation for Bev Harris to show whatever she wants or be on the show.

:shrug:

Something is definitely rotten in the state of Denmark.

[Snivi Yllom]

24. KO pretty much is already stating this on his blog

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6533008/#041201a

"It has been pointed out that Bev Harris was scheduled to be on Countdown back on November 8 but her appearance was cancelled. I haven’t addressed this before, either. But we didn’t cancel on her - we wanted, on that first night raising this touchy subject nobody else had previously covered, to have more mainstream guests. And we wanted her back another night. And since then we’ve wanted her to come back with her video. And she hasn’t."

"I don’t know her motivations and I don’t know her bona fides. But I’m afraid at this stage, intentionally or by the simplest of communication failures, she isn’t helping illuminate this issue. And every step that attracts heat but not light is another step towards discrediting the entire process."

[Walt Starr]

26. Yes, it's pretty evident there between the lines

Ah well, this too shall probably go the way of the LIHOP/MIHOP controversy.

:silly:

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Walt Starr]

47. I'm not a fool

Thankyouverymuch for the personal attack.

[Kelvin Mace]

64. This is SOP for Bev

She has been re-writing history of late. If you check the PDF version of the book on her site and compare it the original on my site, you will start to discover the same parsing and "editing".

If you compare her newest version of the BBV history to things she said in the documentary "Invisible Ballots", you will find the same thing happening.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Snivi Yllom]

67. sort of like changing the results of say, voting?

Hmmm, I wonder where she got that idea?

[Kelvin Mace]

70. There was an irony there

I was not going to comment on...

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[noel711]

22. Could the change...

in the language of the report on BBV be due to legal reasons?
MAybe someone's lawyer's suggested to "tone it down?"
Maybe KO's been pressured to take a "hands-off" stance on the issue?
The mind is boggled by the turn of events!
Gentlemen, don your tin foil hats, and start your engines!

[BevHarris]

30. I did the edits, and even I don't see what facts were changed

I changed "demand" to "request" -- more polite -- and I edited out some typos and corrected the spelling on Keith's last name. I provided dates, had to go look them up.

What exactly was changed?

I clarified the dates and clarified the Volusia County materials from the Palm Beach materials (which WERE provided, by the way!). I omitted the "NBC, CNBC, MSNBC" business about Volusia because, while true, I've never been clear on how related those entities are.

Please point me to any substantive changes.

Bev

[Snivi Yllom]

39. legal language is very precise

Being polite has nothing to do with it. There was an implied threat using the language "demands retraction" and "given him the option". The statement was edited to also say "MSNBC alleged such an untruth". That's a fancy was of saying 'MSNBC lied'.

The additional claim that footage of the Lapore incident was in fact shown to NBC affiliates was added.

[BevHarris]

41. You seem to be confusing a web site update with a legal pleading

And Olbermann confuses two types of videotapes in his article, the videotapes from Volusia and those from the LePore thing. In fact, his article makes no sense, as I fail to see how a 30-second video of presenting LePore with her lawsuit sheds any light at all on specific voting machine fraud. The videotape from the Volusia trash is more informative on that, but still doesn't prove anything.

I did want to clarify that we provided the LePore tape, which was ours to provide. The Volusia videotape does not belong to us, and if MSNBC wants it they need to approach the Votergate producers. To the best of my knowledge, they haven't asked either our group or the Votergate group for that tape.

The poll tapes from Volusia are something altogether different.

Bev

[Walt Starr]

42. So under that logic

Olberman's blog entry is just another web site update and nobody should be getting their panties in a bunch over it.

[AmerDem]

46. and under your logic

You have zero problem taking Olberman's word over Bev's. Let's see here, one is a paid corporate news anchor who's entire livelihood depends on that nice pay check he receives from GE and the other is one of the common folk who long ago took it upon herself to devote an endless effort in exposing the corrupt e-voting system that has stolen two presidencies.

[Walt Starr]

49. Olberman's credibility is superior to Harris'

That's a plain and simple fact here.

[AmerDem]

55. oh please

What gives you the right to say such a thing? Should we go down the road of your famous ribbons investigation? I think not. I'll end it here Sherlock!

[Walt Starr]

57. Um, let's see

One anchors a prime time television news program.

The other has a web site.

:eyes:

Yep, Pretty clear. Olberman has far more credibility than Harris.

And please, bring up the ribbons thing. I never once claimed to be a journalist during that. I never once claimed anything more than seeing a contradiction between the record and the photo. I claimed he wore a ribbon he did not earn. End of the day, I WAS RIGHT. He did not earn the ribbon. He was authorized to wear it temporarily.

So please, bring that up!

[AmerDem]

59. I'm glad you hold such faith

in a "anchor of a primetime television news program". Geeze, the credibilty these people hold is second to none. Thanks for sharing.

[Walt Starr]

60. they have more credibility than a web site owner

Sheesh!

[AmerDem]

61. website owner?

It was the effort she chose first in exposing the e-voting fraud scandal that hastened the formation of a website to get the message out. Surely you are aware of this. I have to say, I find it hard to believe that you are so willing to slam a person like Bev Harris who has been virtually the only person doing everything possible in the way of this scandal. Talk about gratitude! Stick to your admiration of slick talking head types. I'll stand in arms with the almost voiceless brave taking on the big guys.

[Walt Starr]

62. She hasn't exposed a thing!

She's made claim after claim with nothing to back it up!

She has yet to expose a single instance of fraud! All she has are allegations and suppositions.

She has a lack of credibility. For months upon months I watched the SOMETHING BIG IS ABOUT TO BREAK IN BBV threads after 2002. Not a thing ever broke. Allegations, suppositions and rhetorical hyperbole is all I've ever seen, not a shred of hard evidence to demonstrate any form of electoral fraud!

[AmerDem]

63. I guess you missed

The few times she was given air time showing just how easy it was to enter the e-voting system and in less then 1 minute change the results to anything that was wanted. She was a guest on a CNBC show hosted by Howard Dean showing this very same thing. Talk about being at the core of everything that is criminal about e-voting. You are grossly uninformed!

BTW, It sure would be nice if all other networks would have given her such air time considering fair voting is the backbone to our democracy. I guess your highly respected talking heads think otherwise huh?

[Walt Starr]

65. That proved not a single thing

Showing that a thing can happen does not lead to the conclusion that is has happened.

She uncovered nothing. she demonstrated that computerized systems can be hacked. Wooooooooooooh. HUGE news story there. That's been a fact as long as computers have been used, and punch cards are older than I am.

[AmerDem]

74. well you know what?

Let's have the rest of (and i'm willing to guess)our mostly pc illiterate America know just how easy it was for someone to enter our voting system and change things to their liking. I guess under your well thought out assumption they wouldn't care.

WOW, you are really out of touch.

[Snivi Yllom]

44. in your edited statement you claim to have shown the tape to CNN

If you can show it to CNN why can't you show it to MSNBC?

The Volusia videotape does not belong to us, and if MSNBC wants it they need to approach the Votergate producers.

"Harris showed the Volusia County tapes to CNN cameramen, but Harris has never been asked to show any Volusia County materials to any MSNBC producers, or NBC producers."

[BevHarris]

51. We showed the Volusia County POLL TAPES to CNN

We don't have or own the Volusia County videotapes.

[Walt Starr]

54. Pretty stark contradiction there

Curiouser and curiouser.

[in_cog_ni_to]

78. Where's the contradiction?

ORIGINAL BBV post.

The Volusia County tapes were showed to CNN cameramen, but Harris has never been asked to show any Volusia County materials to Olberman, MSNBC producers, NBC producers, CNBC producers, or anyone else with that TV network or its affiliates.

EDITED BBV post.

Harris showed the Volusia County tapes to CNN cameramen, but Harris has never been asked to show any Volusia County materials to any MSNBC producers, or NBC producers.

[uncle ray]

35. dearest Bev

do you know what this means to some of us Americans? do you really?

you can claim whatever legal reasons for keeping the evidence secret, but it won't matter. no matter what precautions and measures you take, when it comes to a court of law, you will always lose at this issue. as much as i and every other american may want you to win, for the sake of democracy, not anybody's profit, you'll still lose. like other posters have said, it's niot a fair fight, so why do you claim/insist on fighting fair?

plain and simple, the info needs to get out into the public. very few of us pay any attention to the voting issues, legal or not, get the info to the poeple. throw the people a bone Bev. we're begging you.

this whole BBV thing has been a nice little drama, but i am embarassed to even point people towards your efforts because of the drama and lack of evidence that will convince the masses.

this whole thing has been a lame fuckaround for years now. after what was documented in 2000 and 2002, geezus, i don't know what to say. it's been the same all along, BIG BBV STORY COMING! BIG NEWS! then THIS IS SO BIG WE CAN'T TELL YOU! meanwhile another election is stolen. so sorry if some of us are confused as to your motives.

on edit: oh and it would be just as well you didn't respond, you got better things to be doing than posting on a message board who's opinions you largely disagree with. go on a tv show or something.

[AmerDem]

38. are you for real?

I have never heard anyone here describe the incredible job done by BBV as a "lame fuckaround". You poster are out of line and uninformed.

[rawstory]

36. Harris has declined to respond to our inquiries

We've made about a half-dozen inquiries to even talk to anyone related to Black Box Voting to write a story; PMed, emailed and called. Nothing.

I can't vouch for anything Mr. Olbermann has said, I know Ms. Harris doesn't have many resources at her disposal, but it's hard not to be frustrated when you're trying to actually write a story and your source refuses to even call you back.

[Walt Starr]

43. I know for a fact you follow up with sources and will personally call

:hi:

I can personally vouch for your veracity when researching story! If you say you've received this sort of treatment, I'm 100% convinced you have!

[BevHarris]

45. Yes. We were receiving 1,000 emails an hour and 800 calls a day

And had only two people, most lately three, to deal with it. Our voicemail was filling up rapidly.

That being said, Olbermann's people don't seem to have made much of an effort. The worst time was the first two weeks after the election. Since then, we've added infrastructure, though still lean, and we now have three different contact numbers on our web site. None of us have had messages from MSNBC and all of us have been checking messages.

One reason I got a media spokesperson (Kathleen) is that I can't investigate stuff and sit on the phone all day doing interviews. I always accept the A-list interviews, and accept all TV that makes sense. Because TV requires you to be in-studio, I can't always do it, but I have not turned down any offer to appear on national TV, and rarely turn down the local shows either, as long as I am in the area.

Now, I actually am going to get back to work. This is the first morning in I don't know how long that I've been able to sit in a hotel room with high speed Internet.

By the way, I've called Olbermann's staff several times today, including two calls before I posted on my web site. I have had no response except from Katy, who admits she never actually got hold of me on anything related to either Volusia or Palm Beach.

Bev

[rawstory]

66. Let me know with your next breakthrough

Feel free to IM on rawstory or shoot me an email through DU.

peace,
=john=

[Wiley50]

75. Bev Please Explain

Why did you go off this morning on the only help I have in this county. I can't begin to tell you how hard Bernie has worked.
You sound like a looney by his account
What gives?

Wiley

[Kelvin Mace]

68. A common complaint from members of the media

I still get calls from folk because Bev doens't call them back. Sometimes they do get through (local radio staitions and papers) and they are told by Bev she only talks to the national media.

Oh, and I get grief from Bev when I do talk to the press and she hears about it. Seems that the topic is hers and no one elses.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org

[Rockerdem]

40. It's pretty clear now that:

a. Bev is not going to be releasing her video. She made a promise to someone out of principle, and it standing by it under intense heat. Kudos for the principled. Rare they are. But it's safe to say that nothing will be forthcoming in the next few weeks from to alter the outcome of THIS election. Maybe future ones, but not this one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

b. KO is not a villain. He is a newsman relying on his producer and his instincts. There is a misunderstanding, and his professional antennae are being vibrated. He will back off the voting scandal story a bit, maybe a lot.

c. This reality is a downer. The main reason that I joined DU after the election was the possibility of something that could change the 2004 corruption. Damn.

[Snivi Yllom]

48. in her own statement she said she showed it to CNN. Why not MSNBC?

[Rockerdem]

53. Maybe CNN was promised an exclusive.

But in truth, I don't know. Even the reason for not showing it seems to be a secret for reasons of integrity.

[BevHarris]

50. Um, this is getting ridiculous

a. Bev is not going to be releasing her video.

I already released it. Did so before Olbermann wrote his thing. I am mystified as to why he wrote it was never released. We released it to the NBC affiliates down here in Florida. We were never called by MSNBC, but we were called by NBC yesterday morning and took a cab 45 miles to take the tape to their local studio.

You, and Keith, are mixing up different videotapes and also, poll tapes.

The video that is ours to release, we released.
It isn't up to us to release a videotape that belongs to someone else.
The poll tapes have been examined by two different lawyers and have been copied for a court hearing tomorrow.
We don't have a high-speed scanner to convert all the poll tapes to pdf, wouldn't do so anyway, and besides, that's about 900 pages.

Bye.

Bev

[Rockerdem]

56. Sorry, Bev

Thanks for the reply. I was trying to defend you, but ignorantly so. Also disregard my later message.

[Proud_Lefty]

76. Wow - Don't give up on us yet!

On November 3rd, the whole country was in shock and mourning when John Kerry conceded. Going over DU for any glimmer of hope, I found it in Bev Harris. She said, stop whining, we got a lot of work to do. I've been following her reports and videos on these fraudulent voting machines for months and respect her to the highest degree.

Keith Olbermann is the only person in the MSM able to report on the irregularities, but he still answers to his corporate bosses and they aren't on our side, even if KO is. Randi Rhodes says she is even forbidden from reporting anything on voting fraud. Bev Harris doesn't answer to any of these guys, and she is currently under fire by the most manipulative a-holes in our country.

We have been pointing fingers and fighting each other for why we lost the election when in reality, we won (probably in a landslide) and Bush stole it. Now, we're all pointing fingers and insulting the very people we depend on so tremendously. Can't we keep it straight and understand who the players are here and support them?

[Shakespeare]

58. Excellent analysis.

I think you're right on with that.

[Coltrane]

52. Olbermann Video Clip

http://www.crooksandliars.com/
is carrying all of the Olbermann segments on their website.
Watch the latest one.

[meisje]

71. What would Michael Moore do???

Would he release the video knowing money could be made? Hmmmmm

[AmerDem]

77. who's releasing any video for money?

Have you read any of this thread?

[WHAT]

72. We Want The Truth...

the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

WHY?...

is the media lying ('scuse me...editing)? facts into irrelevancy? Whatever happened to facts? Facts don't need to be "vetted" by a frivilous media.

Something is going-on. It ain't pretty.

I want to know the truth via evidence which is all that Bev is gathering. What is wrong with gathering evidence and presenting it up for scrutiny. I want scrutiny of facts, not scrutiny of position...the one should follow the other...a position shouldn't imply the facts.

Something is terribly wrong with the media, intentionaly wrong.

WHY?...

[PATRICK]

73. I have seen telling signs that Olberman

is not quite the pro one would wish for, but that is epidemic in today's media. He admits to not researching mind numbing statistics. Well, you get someone reliable not a WH think tank to spin the other way something you didn't get in the first place. He is not alone in that by any means.

I don't think he, or any anchor is totally in control or even in touch with the editor or production elements that serve as his writers, directors or go betweens and assumes the magisterial WE is one in mind and purpose- and that oneness is consummate professionalism.

Whoever has pretensions(We all do) it seems the onus to "handle it" belongs on the journalist who should never make a story out of reporting the story. That is foolish circular unprofessional ism and venting quickly on the Net brings the mighty low every time.

I could go on about Bev but she has little to fault here except for trying to trust this mushmuckraker opportunity to begin with. She is the issue story researcher, not the journalist or the candidate challenger.
The SBVFT got into hot water because of their lies, but the media was very poor in directing questions of a pro nature to them. Bev couldn't get to first base so who knows what anyway except that Olberman needs a lot of input to begin using that great brain. Apparently his staff is more concerned about his cosmetics than research.

Such are the meager tools for moving a buried tale of electoral woe. The silence is the problem, not the individuals trying to work in the general dark, which as we well know is very unnerving for all.

[cry baby]

79. That's right - a discussion, not a yelling match

While you guys are arguing with each other, the issue is being ignored.

OK, Bev, use your influence on the film crew that can shed light on this issue now that you know for a fact that Olbermann wants to show it. Maybe it would be easier for you to contact him since it seems to be hard to get through to you by phone or email. The country is waiting!

Olbermann is just wanting to get something "real" that he can show on his program that will prove there is something fishy going on. He obviously believes there has been fraud!

DU'ers - these two people are on our side, let's try to help them get together instead of bickering and pulling them apart. Let's keep our eye on the ball, don't get distracted in drama.

[Moderator]

80. I'm locking this please discuss here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x104119