I'm going to drop into Hackett's law office tomorrow give me your best...

[roseBudd]

stuff in a form that I can print it.

I do not buy the Clermont results.

Hackett is an attorney who hopefully has some private detectives in his rolodex. A PD or a really good reporter is what it's going to take to crack these electoral fraud cases.

[acmejack]

1. Tell him I'll donate again!

If he wants to find out the truth!

[Ninga]

3. Dear Paul Hacket, "It's not what you do, but who you are as

a person that gives me hope for the future of this country, I hope you run for office again, Ohio and the country needs quality people like you."

[Stevepol]

12. I'll donate too, just as I did for the first illegitimate OH audit.

One day there's going to be an honest audit and when there is, the Bush **** will hit the fan.

[roguevalley]

2. Thank you, Mr. Hackett. Please run again. We need you. Take

care.

[AtLiberty]

4. That's the problem with electronic voting...

...Even if the results are legit (if), we'll doubt them, especially in a close race.

You'd think that the winner would want everyone to know he/she won fair and square.

[wli]

5. optiscan, not electronic machines

The "humidity" shutting down the count, the closed count, and the suspicious "saving Republican bacon" results from Clermont are the big deal. Inspecting ballots and the counting site for tampering, doing recounts, looking into purged voters, etc. are what need to go on.

[roseBudd]

7. anyone crunching Clermont's results for a turnout surge from the late

reporting precincts?

[mod mom]

6. Love to see him join up with Clark. Tell him they used the same MO as the

'04 theft. the dealyed posting of the final 91 precincts. He lost by just under 3%.

[Fly by night]

8. Some comments and questions

It would be interesting to know the difference between the Hackett proportion of the vote in the op-scanned vs. hand-counted votes in Clermont.

It would also be good to see if any of those pesky stickers appeared on the apres-crash ballots.

It would also be good to know if the ballots are numbered to see if we have any out-of-sequence issues (like a stack of pre-filled in ballots just waiting for an attack of humidity).

It would also be nice to hear from the observers re: their perceptions of the problems.

Which ballots from which precincts had not been counted before the "crash"? Were they from the more humid side of the county? (OK, that was a joke.) Honestly, I'm not aware of any public building in the South or near-South that is not air-conditioned these days, unless they vote in barns in Clermont.

Speaking of which, did anything ever happen regarding the affidavits on the stickered ballots that were observed during the faux recount for the 2004 election? I hope that anyone in communication with the Cincy media is putting the reporters in touch with the people who provided those earlier affidavits.

And what do we know about the Repugs and Democrats on the Clermont election commission? Are the Dems there like the DINOs on the Hocking county commission who refused to step down over improperly firing Sherole Eaton after a unanimous "no confidence" vote by Hocking County Democrats?

What is the explanation for Clermont waiting to be the last county reporting? Does the explanation wash?

Did we have sense enough to have a "mole" of our own on the inside this time to document the easily anticipated malfeasance? (Or do only Repugs do that?)

Since Hackett has seen combat recently (and knows the stakes we are really playing for), I hope he steps back into combat mode on our soil. Fighting for free, fair and verifiable elections is much more important than trying to claim "our" oil under Iraqi soil.

[adolfo]

20. There was no hand count or machine malfunction

I called Clermont BOE and there was no hand count. All ballots were optically scanned.


http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050804/NEWS01/508040335/1077/NEWS01

[Fly by night]

22. So why the delay?

If the op-scan crashed, who was on hand to repair it? (A friendly Diebold or ES$S Boy Scout, I suppose.) Details, details, I want details.

[adolfo]

9. I sent you a PM

[Carolab]

10. Show him this.

Also, this is where Judge Connelly (supposedly) whomped Kerry's butt in total number of votes...

Repost from another thread:

Friday, January 28, 2005
More Fraud?
Don't know how accurate this is at this late date, but here it is, for what it's worth:


Several volunteer workers in the Ohio recount in Clermont County, Ohio have prepared affidavits alleging serious tampering, violations of state and federal law and possible fraud. They name the Republican chief of Clermont's Board of Elections Daniel Bare and the head of the Clermont Democratic Party Priscilla O'Donnell as complicit in these acts.

These volunteers, observing the recount on behalf of the Greens, Libertarians and Democrats, assert that during the Dec. 14, 2004 hand recount they noticed stickers covering the Kerry/Edwards oval, whereas the Bush/Cheney oval seemed to be "colored in."

Some witnesses state that beneath the stickers, the Kerry/Edwards oval was selected. The opti-scan ballots were then fed into the machines after the hand recount.

Allegations of ballot tampering in Ohio - which decided the outcome of the presidential election by some 100,000 votes - find particular resonance in Clermont, one of three Ohio counties which saw the biggest increases in votes for Bush from 2000 to 2004. The other counties were Butler and Warren; Warren County had a lockdown after an alleged terror threat that the FBI later denied.


from http://ohvotesuppression.blogspot.com /


And this:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:8i8n4Owu-ZMJ:www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/16/103837/16+Humidity+and+optical+scan+tabulators&hl=en

[garybeck]

11. you should give him one of these::::::::>

http://www.solarbus.org/election/cd/

also there is a good list of factsheets and flyers here that you can print out directly from the web:

http://www.solarbus.org/election/links.shtml#bethemedia

[mod mom]

13. excellent idea Gary! Also, please inform him he can follow our

investigation online here at DU ER+D.

Thanks Rosebud!

[Bill Bored]

14. How about a full hand count of Clermont?

I hate to keep asking this, but where is the statute that said that a 3% random hand count has to become a full hand count if their is any discrepancy?

It's cited on the Greens' site, votecobb.org, but it's not in the Ohio law found in on line libraries.

The OH Legislature's website says that the SOS's office publishes the only official laws of Ohio -- a book called appropriately enough, "The Laws of Ohio."

But you can't look it up in a LAW LIBRARY? WTF???

Maybe Hackett will be able to answer this question and maybe he can get a full hand count in Clermont since they've already admitted that at least some of machines were failing. Worth a shot.

[garybeck]

23. have you tried asking Cliff Arnebeck?

I'll bet he knows.

did you try this:
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/ebook/part5/procedures_recount07.html

[Bill Bored]

24. Yes and Yes and Fitrakis too!

I have not received an answer.

As this is key to the "case" against Blackwell, I think it's really important to know more about it. And for Hackett too.

If I don't get an answer soon, I'm going to ask Blackwell's office.
But of course I'd rather hear the answer from someone I can trust!

I am told that in the former Soviet Union, they had all kinds of laws to protect human rights that no one was allowed to read. This sounds similar, doesn't it?

[Carolab]

28. Bill, it's on the SOS website.

It's part of the procedures. I got it off the Cobb website, too.

http://www.votecobb.org/recount/ohio_reports/#notrandom

Ohio Election Law is very clear on this point:

"The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at least 3% of the total vote, and must conduct a manual count."

"If the tabulator count does not match the hand count, and after rechecking the manual count the results are still not equal, all ballots must be hand counted. If the results of the tabulator count and the hand counted ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed through the tabulator (for optical scan and punchcards)."

(Section 3515 of the Ohio Revised Code)

[Bill Bored]

31. Link to the statute on the SOS website please?

I know it's on votecobb.org

[adolfo]

33. Here is another link for Ohio

http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/oh/lpExt.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=PORC

Search "3515" for the entire text.

[Bill Bored]

35. Sorry, it's not in there.

This is a law library and the 3% random precinct selection procedure isn't in there.

See post #37.

[Carolab]

34. It's right HERE!!!

http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/ElectionsVoter/OhioElections.aspx?Section=38


Outline Of Recount Procedures
(R.C. 3515)

(Scroll down to find:)

The Recount
Ballot cards must be inspected for hanging chad attached by one or two corners, mutilations, and other invalidities. If a chad is attached by three or four corners, a vote shall not be counted for that particular candidate, question or issue.
Overvotes and blank ballots may be separated from the stack at this time and placed at the top of the stack after the header cards.
Ballot page assemblies and rotation header cards must be checked for each precinct for candidate positions to verify that each candidate, question, or issue has been properly identified.
The board must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at least 3% of the total vote. These precincts’ ballots must be manually counted.
Run the manually counted precincts through the computer.
If the computer count does not match the hand count, and after rechecking the manual count the results are still not equal, all ballots must be hand counted. If the results of the computer count and the hand counted ballots are equal, the remainder of the ballots may be processed through the computer and results tabulated electronically.
At the conclusion of the recount, the program must be retested using the pre-audited test deck.

[Bill Bored]

37. Thank you! But read what it says at the top:

"State Issue Procedures"

This appears to be a an amalgamation of state law and a "procedure" probably issued by Blackwell himself.

Now, here's my point:

The Greens (God love 'em!) say this procedure is part of Ohio Law (Revised Code Section 3515). But if you look that up in a LAW Library, it's not there.

So the question is: did Blackwell break the law, or did he just violate one of his OWN PROCEDURES?

I hate to say it, but I think it might be the latter, and for this reason, he may not be prosecutable. I hope I'm TOTALLY WRONG of course, but we have to face the facts as they emerge.

This is why when I hear all this talk from CA and other states about SoS regs, BoE regs, etc., I just cringe! Regulations are made to be broken. The LAW??? That's something else.

I'm more than happy to hear other interpretations of this. As I said I hope I'm wrong!

[Carolab]

41. It ALSO says "R.C." WHICH MEANS REVISED CODE

It's a STATE STATUTE. Statute = LAW.

For Pete's sake, Bill. Cobb's an attorney. Don't you think he knows the difference between a procedure and a statute?

Incidentally. R.C. 3515 was cited as the basis for Moss vs. Bush.

Further, you can look up R.C. 3515 in Moritz Law, under STATUTES.

Also, at Anderson-on-line:

http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/oh/lpExt.dll?f=templates&fn=main-h.htm&cp=PORC

§ 1.01. "Revised Code."

All statutes of a permanent and general nature of the state as revised and consolidated into general provisions, titles, chapters, and sections shall be known and designated as the "Revised Code," for which designation "R.C." may be substituted. Title, Chapter, and section headings and marginal General Code section numbers do not constitute any part of the law as contained in the "Revised Code."

The enactment of the Revised Code shall not be construed to affect a right or liability accrued or incurred under any section of the General Code prior to the effective date of such enactment, or an action or proceeding for the enforcement of such right or liability. Such enactment shall not be construed to relieve any person from punishment for an act committed in violation of any section of the General Code, nor to affect an indictment or prosecution therefor. For such purposes, any such section of the General Code shall continue in full force notwithstanding its repeal for the purpose of revision.


HISTORY: Bureau of Code Revision. Eff 10-1-53.

[Bill Bored]

42. Go ahead, look it up.

You will not find the random precinct language and the procedures there.
If you do, send me a link. What you will find is RC 3515, which does not include that language.

I may be dense, but I've been looking for it since Dec and the only place I've found it is on votecobb.org and now thanks to you, Blackwell's site. But it does not appear to be an actual law and this is why I asked a couple of OH lawyers about it. But they didn't answer me. Probably too busy with Hackett's race, which is understandable.

The law probably allows the SoS to write this stuff.
If he can make it, perhaps he can break it too, or that would be his defense if he were ever on trial. It's the same idea as Bush's FCC, EPA, etc. not enforcing media and environmental regulations. Unless it's a LAW, they ignore it, and perhaps they ignore a fair bit of law too. But law is lot harder to ignore than just regulations.

[Carolab]

43. I agree it's confusing but...

I asked someone at the forefront of the election reform movement specifically, myself, whether the SOS "writes the rules" or the legislature does.

The legislature writes the rules, and they revise them and they repeal them too. They have oversight over this in the sense that it is law...it is procedural, yes, but it is written as law.

That is why I keep telling people: the SOS does NOT have the ultimate authority under HAVA. The legislature does. That is why we must work on our local and state representatives to get them to write new legislation that specifically addresses the election procedures, in PARTICULAR, the security and recount legislation. Federal solutions are liable to foul us up even more, especially given who is currently "working on it" (Baker, et al). We need to work on the STATE laws. Voting is a STATE right, NOT a Federal one.

That said, go back up and READ the links I gave you, especially the one from Anderson's on-line. It is CLEAR that this is a statute. It is "revised code" of the statute, but it is still statute, and it is still LAW.

[Bill Bored]

44. But the stuff we're talking about isn't in the statute!

I agree with everything else you've said though. :)

Look, in NY, I can tell you exactly what's currently in the new voting machine laws and what was left up to the BoE to define (which the law gives them the right to do). We don't have our SoS doing that sort of thing; we have a bi-partisan BoE doing it, which is how it should be, but that's yet another issue.

When I read the NY law, it makes sense to me. I may not agree with all of it, but at least I can tell from reading it who's responsible for doing what. Not so with Ohio law, at least not so far. Perhaps this is the whole problem in a nutshell.

[Carolab]

45. Here's why

http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/laws.cfm

Laws of Ohio, a publication of the Secretary of State's office issued at the end of each General Assembly, is the only official publication of the enactments of the General Assembly. (Enactments are the bills passed by the Senate and House and sent to the Governor for his signature or veto.) This publication contains all the laws passed by the General Assembly, including the ones vetoed by the Governor, as well as the uncodified laws (those laws which are not permanent in nature and not codified in the Revised Code.) The acts filed with the Secretary of State's office are the actual statutory law of Ohio. The Ohio Revised Code, whether in book for or on-line is only a reference and not the official record. For more information on the Laws of Ohio, contact the Secretary of State's office at [phone].

[Bill Bored]

46. I know this and I've mentioned it before.

But can Blackwell actually MAKE LAW? Since he's not in the legislature, and certainly would not constitute a majority, I'd say the answer is no. He can make regulations though.

I'm telling you this smells!

I'd like to know if this is a law or a regulation. If it's a regulation only, it might explain why no one has been willing to prosecute him for breaking it. That's all I'm sayin'.

[Carolab]

47. Why not get a copy of the "Laws of Ohio"?

That would probably answer your question definitively.

[Bill Bored]

48. I'm not looking to make a career out of this!

I thought someone here on the greatest election fraud forum in America, if not the world, http://electionfraud.net would be able to sort it out.

Maybe I'm just nitpicking.

[Carolab]

49. Why not ask CASE Ohio? I'm sure they can quote it to you.

After all they've been knee-deep in all of these lawsuits.

[eridani]

15. Ask him what he knows about supervision of the counts in--

--Clermont and Warren Counties. Remind him that Clermont County is where people were caught putting stickers over punch holes for Kerry in Nov. 2004, and Warren County is where there was no oversight whatsoever of the counting process because they put our a fake terror alert.

Tell him we need to do it even if the audit still comes out as a loss for him. We MUST make public auditing the rule for the sake of future elections.

[Land Shark]

16. I'll be talking about his race on air america 2 p.m. EST (Thom Hartmann)

For starters, it is scientifically solid and bullet proof to state there where the data are not disclosed (i.e. the ballots) and the analysis is not disclosed (i.e. the trade secret vote counting software methods) there is simply NO BASIS FOR CONFIDENCE in the results.

So there's no basis for any rational confidence in the results at any time, and on top of that strange things have happened.... What seems prudent to you?

just start pushing for disclosure and truth. Who knows, maybe Schmidt won by more, if so, truth out... Then find out who pushes back. You either get truth, or you find out who the enemies of democracy are. either way, you win, and you're operating from a bullet proof position of trying to have some basis for confidence in election results, but being prevented from having that by secrecy in elections.

[FreedomAngel82]

17. Please let us know what all you find out

Good luck! Isn't Dean fighting this too?

[riqster]

18. Hackett's public statements seem to indicate that he believes he lost.

He does not seem to understand the fundamental sea change that has taken place in this nation- ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN PRIVATIZED! And without public oversight, no election is valid, and none can be trusted.

[Land Shark]

19. some will say it makes 'sense' that schmidt would win clermont but

it makes as much sense that she'd win all the counties in a supposedlly heavily GOP district. in fact hackett won four counties according to the published conclusions of the election.

It makes SENSE that with approval of the GoP president in the low 40s at best that republicans would lose nearly every election (what is the rating in the 2nd of ohio?)

We need Talking Heads to Stop Making Sense and instead get the data and facts and come to our own conclusions. (no musical album puns intended here)

[Fly by night]

21. Bush's approval rating in Ohio in May was 37%; in June, 40%.

And Daffy Taft's approval rating statewide is 15%. No Repug should win a race in Ohio with their President's approval rating so low and their corrupt Governor going down for the third time, weighed down by bags-ful of rare coins.

Fish food -- that's what election-thieving Republi-Nazis are good for.

[roseBudd]

29. I agree that is why they played with the results in SW OH because it

in 04 because it "makes sense" to the naysayers.

To steal it in Cuyahoga would have been too obvious.

[liam_laddie]

25. Clermont results...

Please see my post in adolfo's "Clermont rumors..." thread.

[mopinko]

26. looking forward to an update, rosebud nt

[roseBudd]

27. According to today's paper Hackett is to return to his law practice...

I figure he is taking a rest and I want to give DUers a chance to write/polish their arguments. I am going to print everything x4 and drop off personally at his law officeand the local Dems and put copies in the mail.

I know exactly where his office is. His receptionist wanted to know who was calling when Iasked where they were located.

[mod mom]

30. I'm afraid if he goes on another tour of duty some wingnut will take him

out for calling * a chickenhawk. As we all know the truth doesn't always set you free.

[Bill Bored]

32. I fear for him too, but not because of your average wingnut

I was thinking more of a conspiracy of some sort.

On the other hand, maybe he could start a movement of some kind over there, consistent with the rules of the game of course.

[bleever]

36. Good luck.

:thumbsup:

[philb]

38. Here's an article about the "machine problems" in Clermont

http://billmon.org/archives/002073.html

[philb]

39. Fraud happened in Clermont in 2004 Election; here is Green Party report

Recount:

Clermont County (Punch card) ***
http://www.votecobb.org/recount/ohio_reports/counties/clermont.php

3% random sample was not random; only small precincts included; hand count didn't match machine but didn't follow Ohio rule to count all by hand There was indication of inconsistent policies in counting favoring Bush and evidence of tampering according to witness. County officials uncooperative; would not let observers see info needed to confirm results, such as overvotes. Kerry votes on some cards had stickers over them so could not be counted by compiler. No explanation given.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=7
***********************************

Someone needs to check for the white stickers again.

[freedomfries]

40. spin-proof expert opinion

dear rosebud
you may want to also arm yourself with this interview and vote-rigging demonstration from one of the most reputable computer security expert in the world. There's probably no one in the field with better professional credentials than Spaf.
http://www.wishtv.com/global/story.asp?s=1649501&ClientType=Printable