You'll want to see this too ASAP cause it's long overdue.

[texpatriot2004]

http://www.legitgov.org/coup_2004.html

[Griffy]

1. Good info.. SO anyone here STILL think bush won??

Are there still DUers that can read this and say Kerry didnt win?? Cause I see some people that still "dont know". Look.. I understand its tough to amdit you've been robbed.. but you have, we all have.. and the sooner you relize it, the sooner you can join in the fight to stop it. Because you'll NEVER get anywhere with election reform if your 1st line is.. the right man won but...

and we have no media, so we need you now more than ever, so plz.. take a deep breath and relax and welcome to the revolution!

[texpatriot2004]

4. I never thought he won to begin with. So let the revolution

begin. Can we send this info out now? Is it time to broadcast.

[OnTheOtherHand]

13. yes, I think Bush probably won.

Lots of Democrats believe this, but they tend not to hang out on ERD.

[Griffy]

14. WHY?? I cant understand that.. did Iraq have WMD too??

so you think the counting was accurate?? and if it wasnt, why do you think bush won.. its amazing the way people will deny the obvious in order not to believe something worse. Like we don't have a representative government, and we are in a fascist regime (companies running the government=fascism).

Please explain why you think bush won and where you get your info.

.. and do you think people will focus on fixing the voting system if they believe the right man won??

Kerry won.. get over it and do something about it!!

[OnTheOtherHand]

15. no, Iraq didn't have WMDs

There isn't much I can say about the part of your message in which you say that I'm obviously wrong. I know lots of people who agree with you. I also know lots of people who think that you are obviously wrong. I try to keep a sense of humor about it.

Like most people, I get my info from all sorts of places.

I don't know whether people will focus on fixing the voting system if they believe the right man won (i.e., that the votes were more or less fairly counted). So far, trying to convince them all that the election was stolen hasn't worked too well -- although it might, if someone finds more direct evidence. Meanwhile, there had better be a place for people who aren't convinced about 2004, but are worried about the future.

[Griffy]

21. After reviewing the facts...

I dont know anyone that thinks bush won... I had friends that like you werent sure... so we sat down and I showed them the evidence. I let them read my copy of "what went wrong in Ohio". Every one of them now understands the rigged nature of the election. So I dare say that the evidence you seek is there, just takes a little time to read and understand.

I see compelling evidence in the statistics, and I see compelling motive and opportunity (like locked down courthouses for secret counting). I see liars and cheaters behind the HAVA and heads of bush/chenny campaign overseeing the elections. I see heavily republican companies supplying Evoting with non-disclosed software with no paper to recount(though Diebold makes ATM's all of which print paper). I see exprogrammer testifing under oath that they were asked to create software to rig the outcome! So, did you know all this.. and still give the benefit of the doubt to bush? I dont get that...

I know this was rigged like I know evolution is a fact.. and gravity, and global warming... It is the gathering of information and understanding it. So when I say it is obvious, I mean to those that look close enough and listen to the facts without prejudging the outcome or trying to fit the facts to what you believe. Truth be told, I would rather bush had won fair, and that your election system was working... as it is I dont know what it will take to bring honest, transparent elections to America, but I will fight every way I can till we do, and the 1st step is to realize the problem. Prehaps dems will win in big enough numbers to make a count change too obvious, then again... this is pretty obvious already... with millions of votes flipped and padded.

So I ask again... WHY do you think bush won??

[OnTheOtherHand]

24. I'm afraid I see where this is going

I've been reviewing the facts since November. I just don't agree about where they point. E-voting is a mess, but Bush did well on every voting machine type. (Sure, they could all be rigged, or the totals could be, but I haven't seen anyone come close to proving that.) It's been argued that the pre-election polls showed Kerry ahead, but the people who actually conducted the polls don't agree. It's been argued that exit polls are never wrong, but it's not true.

It's possible that Bush stole Ohio (and certainly Blackwell did a lot to help him even before the vote count began). I've read the Conyers report, and it doesn't convince me that Ohio was stolen. I'm working with some folks to see whether it's possible to find better evidence.

I know lots of smart people who, rightly or wrongly, don't think the election was stolen. I know lots of smart people who do think it was stolen. So I just don't buy the idea that all reasonable people have to agree about this. Maybe, on some perfect world, everyone ought to agree, but the fact is, we don't.

My crazy idea is that instead of getting hung up on arguing endlessly about 2004, progressives (and even other folks) can agree that, as you say, we don't have transparent elections here in America. We know that the election system is broken here not because everyone agrees who won in 2004, but because people don't agree who won.

(EDIT: By the way, I'm not saying that we should stop talking about 2004, or that people who believe that the election was stolen shouldn't say so. I'm saying that our disagreement about that shouldn't paralyze us.)

[kiwi_expat]

27. The election was "stolen" even if Bush won the actual Ohio votes cast .

Most of us include voter suppression (such as the destruction of Democrats' voter-registration forms, and the stricter voter-ID requirements and long lines at urban precincts) in the definition of "stolen".


Richard Hayes Phillips says,
"These accounts of voter suppression, ballots cast but not counted, and alteration of the vote count, were sufficient to reverse the outcome of the presidential election. It is my professional opinion, having exhaustively examined the available evidence, that the 2004
presidential election was stolen."
http://web.northnet.org/minstrel/testimony.htm

[OnTheOtherHand]

29. right, "stolen" means different things to different people

and sometimes even to the same people in different contexts. It can make it pretty hard at times to figure out who is arguing what.

Some folks say that obviously the election was stolen because the electronic voting machines have been rigged. Others point to 92,000 undervotes in Ohio -- which uses mostly punch cards. Those arguments aren't necessarily contradictory, but they are at least different.

There have been punch card undervotes for a long time -- they don't necessarily evince anything being "stolen" -- but they indicate that the system stinks.

There have been vote suppression efforts for a long time -- they may or may not have decided any particular election -- but anyone who thinks that vote suppression doesn't really matter unless it determines the outcome lives in a different moral universe than mine (yours too, I bet).

People's professional opinions about Ohio 2004 do differ. But I don't think there is anyone outside Blackwell's office who would say that the system worked.

[kiwi_expat]

30. I assume that people who say the election was "stolen" mean either...

(1) there were more people who THOUGHT they had voted for Kerry than there were people who thought they had voted for Bush, or

(2) there were more people who TRIED to vote for Kerry than than there were people who tried to vote for Bush (this 2nd definition includes vote suppression).


Are you suggesting that some folks think that foul play, ALONE, means that an election is "stolen" - even if they think the (total) foul play might be insufficient to affect the outcome of the election?

[OnTheOtherHand]

31. umm, no

but I can see why you're asking. I was trying to make multiple points at once.

An election could be stolen (i.e., the outcome altered) through vote stealing, or vote suppression, or misinformation (implying a third definition, that more people WOULD HAVE tried to vote for Kerry if they had been fully informed), or any combination of those and other things.

All those things are wrong whether or not they alter the election outcome. If someone steals my vote, or steals my right to vote, my rights have been violated whether or not the election outcome is altered.

It's _also_ true that if someone says "the 2004 election was stolen," one often can't immediately be sure what is meant.

[driver8]

2. Man, the more I read about election fraud the more pissed off

I get. Because of this, we are suffering through four more years of this incompetent administration. It makes me sick to my stomach to think about it.

[texpatriot2004]

5. NO we are NOT suffering through 4 more years. The GIG is UP.

Time to pay the piper. ACCOUNTABILITY IS COMING AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE BRINGING IT!

It's interesting to me the innumerable lies of * the secrecy (WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?) and the complete sham of "Government" we have had.

[libertypirate]

12. Hey

This is what I yelled at Haserts Aid before I hung up on him on the first Friday after Katrina.

ACCOUNTABILITY IS COMING AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE BRINGING IT

[pushycat]

26. Thanks, from me

for doing that. What a great thing to do! ha

[NoBushSpokenHere]

3. kicked and recommended ........n/t

[texpatriot2004]

6. I am all about legitimate government, how about you? n/t

[Stevepol]

7. Just keep doing all we can do, whatever that means.

We can send flyers to the elections commissioners. Of course, we can tell everybody we meet when the subject comes up that Kerry won by about 3%, a comfortable win, and we can give whatever evidence we find most convincing. We can send LTTE. We can do any number of other things as the opportunity arises, thru our friends.

We can w/hold money from all orgs that don't admit and work toward fair elections. What right does any so-called political org have to ask for my money if they don't care a whit about my vote? None of these orgs have any meaning if we don't have a democracy, and we don't have one until we have fair vote counting.

As new opportunities arise to tell the story or publicize it, we need to stay ready to do what we can.

Who knows what will happen today or tomorrow? We can stay confident and keep smiling. The truth is on our side AND THE TRUTH WILL OUT!!

[roseBudd]

16. we can write BushCheated04.com on post it notes and stick them everywhere

the web site
http://bushcheated04.com

the proof
http://bushcheated04.com/links.html

the song
http://bushcheated04.com/loser.html

[Greyhound]

8. I have a question. Since they are the folks with the most to gain, and

the funds to do it, why hasn't the DNC brought a well publicized law suit? As the website (and the other link therein) you pointed to in your post shows, it is clear that there was a successful conspiracy to steal the elections, and the public forum of the courts would be an excellent place to bring it out.

[Angry Girl]

9. No kidding! That's why I think Kerry is such a dick for conceding!

Nightweed's Hurricane Katrina Aid Organizations

[roseBudd]

17. Because they can't prove it. They would have to seize evidence...

And there has been ample time to cover any tracks.

[Greyhound]

19. Oops, dupe.

[Greyhound]

20. I don't buy that. It is provable through mathematics alone.

There is no possibility that virtually 100% of "voting anomalies" favor one outcome. There is also no lack of physical evidence, the source code has been exposed and the author has testified. What do you think is needed?

[Griffy]

22. Prove to who? people that think evolution is a theory.??

they cant understand the math, which clearly shows the rigged nature of Evoting machines... and we know the software was non-disclosed.

But Kerry coulda fought... he didnt, but he is still in the game, and is basically on our side.

the problem is the big lie theory... rigging the presidential race is so huge most Americans cant handle it... even some here on DU wont accept the obvious, but I know from experience... if you take the time and sit down with your friends and family and calmly show them the evidence, let them read "What went wrong in Ohio". They will understand.

[roseBudd]

25. Punch card ballots that have no fingerprints on them because they were

punched by a machine. Ballots out of sequence. We do need to seize the ballots. Ohio was predominantly punch cards.

Poll books with signatures that do not match. Canvassing of voters who may not have voted, but who had their names signed for them.

[bleever]

10. A fabulous compendium of damning evidence.

Thanks for posting this, texpat!

Nominated.

:thumbsup:

[texpatriot2004]

11. Bleever it was my supreme pleasure n/t

[theboz]

18. Kerry conceded, so Bush won

Whether or not Bush was legit in his votes, we can't say, but the fact of the matter is that Kerry gave up pretty quickly and easily.

My wife thinks that Kerry was in on the fraud if it occurred. It seemed way too close for any reasonable person to give up, especially in Ohio where there were all sorts of reports of potential fraud. I don't know that he threw the election even though he screwed up quite a bit, but it does seem odd that he gave up so easily.

[Griffy]

23. no..Kerry won, bush was inaugurated... thats the problem!

it matters alot, the sytem was rigged, vote flipping and padding turned millions of votes around... and it wasnt that close... the final numbers they fed us were close.

The evidence is clear to those that read it and understand... like evolution it is dimissed by those that dont want to consider that what they have been thinking is wrong, the facts are there, but require education to fully comprehend.

[texpatriot2004]

28. So he has to fail to perform the oath he has sworn.

Correct.

[texpatriot2004]

32. He has failed to perform the oath...now he must go. n/t