Why has Congress focused on suppression but avoided vote machine fraud?

[berniew1]

and dirty tricks?
Vote machine fraud found:
Florida, Ohio, New Mexico http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
Texas(Austin,Houston,SanAntonio) http://www.flcv.com/texas.html
Pennsylvania http://www.flcv.com/mercerco.html
Washington http://www.flcv.com/snohomis.html
California http://www.flcv.com/orangets.html
New Mexico http://www.flcv.com/bernalil.html
North Carolina, Wisconsin, Indiana, Texas, etc.
(default straight ticket Dem to Bush

Widespread dirty tricks:
Florida http://www.flcv.com/dirtytrf.html
Ohio http://northnet.org/alpage.htm
Big DU thread on throwaway of Dem registrations
Texas Hit Squad in Ohio, etc.

[punpirate]

1. My best guess is that most of our...

... Democratic Congress critters can't conceive of how it can happen, and therefore don't address it, for fear of exposing their ignorance. The Repugs don't because they don't want to accidentally reveal their trade secrets. :)

[garybeck]

24. because they say there's no proof nt

[VTGold]

2. Probably because you can prove suppression more easily and prosecute

civil rights violations that way.

Plus they can't wear their tinfoil hats as proudly as we can - not on the floor of the House - isn't seemly I guess....

[berniew1]

4. Why do you think suppression is easier to prove than machine fraud;

I think its the other way around. The vote machine fraud is pretty obvious and they know which precincts it happened in; have witnesses; etc.
Its easier to argue suppression was accidental; not intended; though the widespread consistent nature of the suppression makes it clear that it was systematic and intentional; happened in many states.

[intheflow]

6. We can't prove machine fraud unless we get access to the code.

Since private companies develop, own, and write the code for the programs, they can claim proprietary ownership and intellectual property rights and deny investigators access. No access, no proof.

Meanwhile, we have hundreds, maybe thousands, of affidavits from voters who were disenfranchised, and video tape of intimidation and suppresion. Therefore, it's easier to prove suppression.

[Peace Patriot]

22. "We can't prove machine fraud unless we get access to the code"?

Not true. When financial fraud is committed, and the evidence is shredded, prosecutors can use the same kind of analysis that Dr. Steven Freeman, Dr. Ron Baiman, Dr. Michael Haut, Dr. Webb Mealy, TruthIsAll and ignatzmouse at DU, Jonathan Simon (at www.scoop.co.nz), and others have used to establish the astronomical odds against a Bush victory in all sorts of different data sets (the state exit polls, the national exit poll, paper vs. electronic, 2000 vs. 2004, and top of the ticket vs. lower ticket, etc.)--that is, statistical analysis. It can be used in court when evidence has been destroyed. And it can furthermore be used to force disclosure of hidden evidence, such as the source code.

The trouble if we don't have courts that are into truth and justice.

And we don't have a single Democrat with the nerve to pursue it.

(Note: The Democrats sat back and let this piece of shit of an election system be put into place--a system controlled with secret source code that will never permit a Democrat to be elected president, and will never elect a progressive Congress, ever again--and breathed hardly a word of protest. Go figure. Their silence now should surprise no one. They have been inattentive, naive, corrupt and/or collusive. They DIDN'T CARE how votes get counted? Politicians DIDN'T CARE? They DIDN'T BOTHER to look into it? They COULDN'T UNDERSTAND it? What's to understand about secret source code? Come on.)

[VTGold]

9. I was actually speaking in the case of Ohio - its easy to prove that

machines were taken from minority and university precincts - and added to white suburban areas.

Its easy to prove that for the Spring primaries there more voting machines in minority and university precincts than there were for the Presidential election when they KNEW registration had skyrocketed.

Its easy to prove that voting machines were left un-deployed in warehouses.

Its easy to prove that poll workers were begging for those machines and were told none were available.

Its easy to prove that they were using old voter rolls at the polling places - again knowing there had been massive registrations since those books were created.

The list goes on.

I don't know as much about other states but Ohio is clear.

As for machine fraud - the biggest hurdle seems to be psychology. So few are able to believe in it - even die-hard leftly liberals. I don't know a sole around me who believes. Sadly, if I didn't have DU, I wouldn't know anyone.

[Amaryllis]

16. But it is extremely difficult to PROVE fraud, in the legal sense. You can

document ten hour waits in line in African American precincts while affluent white precincts had no lines. You have to access the machines and do forensic audits to prove fraud and they are doing everything in their power to prevent that.

[zann725]

19. Yeah...Suppression is illegal too. And easier to prove.

n/t

[imenja]

3. political language is strategic

They spoke in terms they felt would have the most sway with the American voters. You'll notice the Republicans did the same, though what they said completely ignored the Democrat's argument.
My guess is they thought talking about tampering with machines would seem far fetched to many. For me, however, the evidence that made me start to think this whole thing might have been deliberate was the testimony of two elections company programmers that they had been asked or requested to illegally program machines. At least one of them testified before the Conyers commission, so we know that some members of congress are aware of the problem.

[johnaries]

5. Because they have to be able to examine the machines - BEFORE

they are cleared. To my knowledge, that hasn't been allowed to happen.

[berniew1]

7. But why haven't Dems & Congress & public insisted???

What we are talking about is extremely illegal; and it is clear how and where it happened. The computer experts agree. No other explanation.

[johnaries]

11. Good question! Does anyone know what happened to the motion

that Kerry filed to have the machine evidence in Ohio protected? I know there were a lot of "stalling" tactics used to keep anything from happening until after the Electoral Vote was accepted, but I haven't heard anything else.

[Catbird]

8. Security by Obscurity

Everyone can understand pictures of long lines of people waiting to vote, possibly in uncomfortable weather conditions. And they're hard to ignore. Who wants to come out in FAVOR of waiting in long lines to vote?

Not everyone can understand poorly designed or malicious computer programs and interfaces, especially when the code is handled as a trade secret (security by obscurity). Not even computer security experts can comment in detail on what actually happened (as opposed to what might have happened) during the recent election since the machines and their software have not generally been available to examine.

My hope is that the concerns over suppression will result in enough digging around that these other problems will be pulled out of the muck as well.
:argh:

[sandnsea]

10. Oh for pete's sake

What crawls up everybody's ass and makes them say the stupidest shit about Democrats? I have heard countless Democrats address the voting machines. Do people not understand when you pretend Democratic voices aren't present, you actually help to muffle those who are speaking? All anybody hears is the Democrats don't care, so that becomes conventional wisdom? Gads.


John Kerry:

"..as the greatest, wealthiest nation on earth, our citizens should never be forced to vote on old, unaccountable and non transparent voting machines from companies controlled by partisan activists."


Cam Kerry:

"trust in the system requires that it be transparent; whether inside local election board offices or inside the code of electronic voting machines"

Donna Brazile as Chair of the DNC Voting Rights Institute:

"..This study will address the legitimate questions and concerns that have been raised in Ohio about provisional ballots, long lines at polling places, and questions about voting machines."

[Beth in VT]

12. Good point, but

I think they're referring to members of Congress - their comments on 6 January and their proposals. They seem to think paper trail will fix the problem.

[sandnsea]

13. They didn't avoid the machines either

It's a bullshit post and I'm flat out sick of them. If the poster wants to talk about the paper trail, talk about them. Don't need a constant bash of the only people who can help us make the changes.

[berniew1]

14. I'm talking about the fraud that happened in at least 10 states in the ts

touchscreen machine counties, that I've documented. I'm not talking about generic statements. I'm asking about why specific illegal actions that people know which machines were involved and how it was done. Why hasn't anyone in Congress or etc. said anything about those, or why hasn't it been investigated and prosecuted. Its rather illegal, and it pretty obvious that who did it comes down to very narrow choices.

[berniew1]

15. Two more states found to have vote machine fraud- S. Carolina & Virginia

http://www.flcv.com/southcar.html
http://www.flcv.com/fairfax.html

[sandnsea]

23. What fraud?

Machine glitches? You've got access to the code to prove these were intentional errors? You've got the names of the people who coded the machines?

If you do, that's terrific. I haven't heard a peep about it.

Machine errors are not evidence of fraud. Machine errors do need to be investigated. Which is exactly what all these Democrats are saying.

[Peace Patriot]

25. sandnsea: "Oh for pete's sake" (#10)

These are very lame statements by John and Cam Kerry, and much too late in the day. Where was John Kerry when this blatantly corrupt, non-transparent, BushCon-controlled election system was put into place?

And Donna Brazile endorses a STUDY! A STUDY! When BushCons created 3.5 million votes out of thin air?

I just cringe at the language: "...address the legitimate questions and concerns..."!, and then it takes her...oh, so-o-o-o-o very long to get to the e-e-e-e-end of the sentence to whisper......questions...QUESTIONS!...about "voting machines."

Questions.

What's to "question" about BushCons owning the SECRET, PROPRIETARY source code that counts all our votes? What's to understand about this?

I think these people absolutely betrayed us, but I'll be damned if I can figure out WHY--except maybe they LIKE the Iraq War, 100,000 dead Iraqis, and massive theft--because it makes them look good!

Really, I'm at my wit's end--and the end of my patience--trying to figure out the DNC's game.

[sandnsea]

28. Now that's a legitimate complaint

Secret, proprietary source code, NO MATTER WHO OWNS IT, should not be used for our voting machines. We fought for open source voting legislation in Oregon, we lost. I don't understand why Americans in general put up with this. That capitalist mentality I guess. It would have been easier to promote open source if we hadn't labeled it all a conspiracy without evidence. Most Americans don't believe their Republican friends and family are evil, so they don't believe Republican business is evil.

Anyway, my point was that the OP was wrong on the machines. They are being addressed, along with everything else. It's a bafflement to me that every single thing that's wrong in this country is put on the head of John Kerry. If I'd quoted other Democrats instead, the complaint would have been "why didn't John Kerry say anything". I don't understand this obsessive Kerry hate, I really don't.

[Joe Chi Minh]

29. Unfortunately, Sandnsea, they

do it in the other direction, too. As if what the neocons do or don't do, will or won't do, matters tuppence! Ooh... err.. Of course, their trolls encourage it at every opportunity.

[minorjive]

17. It might have something to do with the Reps constituents

Most of the Reps. who objected are Black Members of Congress with predominantly Black constituencies. Those are the communities that suffered the most from suppression tactics. Stands to reason that their Reps would feel some obligation to emphasize that issue.

[RaulVB]

18. Because this is a Republican controlled Congress (n/t)

[Red State Blues]

20. Because, an investigation into

Election Fraud could overturn an election while focusing on suppression is politically "safe", will get the Ohio NAACP a pitiful check in a year or so, and will ultimately accomplish nothing.

Sorry for my cynicism but I'm surrounded by Republicans and after the billions we just spent "reforming" the system after 2000 and the 17,000 attorneys that were on hand for the election I just don't see a massive election reform movement taking off. I hope you "blue staters" can get something going but I believe I could have an undoctored photo of Ken Blackwell burning millions of clearly identified democratic ballots and it still wouldn't penetrate the thick (skulls) shield of denial 'round these parts.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Ohio lose representation in the House for their transgressions (and Florida, and my home state SC, and anywhere else where people were wrongfully and intentionally denied the right to vote). There's quite a few people who ought to be in jail over this as well.

I hope we do reform the system but I suspect we'll see our payroll taxes raised, further tax cuts for the wealthy and the masses will consider themselves lucky to not have as much of their Social Security contributions stolen from them as Bush will initially propose. (and that SS "reform/theft" will take the wind out of the sails of the vote issue)

'68 Nixon : secretly (and treasonously) negotiates with the North Koreans to end their cease fire in the summer before the election resulting in throwing the election his way (and four more of the bloodiest years of the Viet Nam war).

'72 Nixon : John Lennon joins massive progressive movement; deported. Watergate. Ensuing Watergate scandal leaves all Republicans EXCEPT Nixon in the White House.

'76 Ford : Branding Carter a "flip-flopper" tremendously effective, but even some American swing voters can remember that a year and a half ago that all these SOB's were crooks.

'80 Reagan : Bush secretly (and treasonously) negotiates with the Iranians NOT to release hostages as planned, steals the election and then embarks on 12 years of the largest criminal enterprise the world has ever seen.

'92 Bush : loses the election, but NOT because any of the thousands of reasons that should have him in jail (or executed) and have the rest of the family leaving the country and changing their name in shame BUT because he was forced to raise taxes due to Reagan's "creative" economic policies.

'00 and '04 : well, you know.

Remember, election fraud is a "new" problem.


I'm sorry if I'm a wet blanket, I'm not a freeper, just horribly, horribly depressed. (and cursed with a functioning memory)

[loudsue]

21. Let's show Patricia McKinney the evidence!!!! WHAMMO!

She's one lady that's NOT afraid to take the battle to the forefront.

I :loveya: our newly reinstated hero!! She's ONE SMART WOMAN!!

She listens, and she GETS IT!!

:kick::kick::kick::kick:

[garybeck]

26. they say it's because there's no proof

[bush_is_wacko]

27. They are looking for proof...

It takes a lot of time to get enough machine sampling to find out what happened. Thugs have been blocking access to these machines every way they can think of. In NM they are attempting to purge the machines even though LAW says they have to hold on to it for 22MONTHS. It sounds to me as if there is AT LEAST one team probably more trying to find out what they can. While looking for the evidence they also must be very careful not to disturb it.

They may not be talking about it to keep the Thugs looking away from that particular issue until they have already found it.

Here's the link to the NM story:


http://www1.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19858_3453082,00.html

Discussed on this DU thread from 1/14/05:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x283211