Wonderful letter to AG Holder pleading with him to outlaw DREs for upcoming elections.

[Stevepol]

The letter comes from Kevin Zeese, an attorney representing Velvet Revolution, and it summarizes some of the most telling arguments in favor of returning to paper based elections.

Here are a few highlights of the letter:

I am writing as an attorney and board member of Protect Our Elections.org to request that
you take immediate action to require that all states, counties and other jurisdictions that
use Direct Recording Electronic (DRE, usually touch-screen) voting systems in their
federal elections immediately cease using them in for any future elections. I make this
request under the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Constitution and under
various sections of the Voting Rights Act.

....snip

Just three weeks ago, these 100% unverifiable machines were used in South Carolina's
Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate between Vic Rawl and Alvin Greene. The
validity of the results of that race has been called into question, with the Democratic
Majority Whip in the U.S. House, Rep. James Clyburn, expressing his belief publicly on
Fox News that the results were due to the election system having been electronically
"hacked". Judge Rawl himself has said alleged that the results were due to "systemic
software problems".

Virtually every expert -- both statisticians and computer experts alike -- who looked at
the results found unexplained anomalies, such as a vast disparity in the paper-based
absentee ballot results and those reported by the unverifiable e-vote systems used on
Election Day. In county after county, Judge Rawl was found to have won, resoundingly,
in absentee ballots, but lost by an inexplicable majority on the Election Day DRE tally.
In some counties, Mr. Greene reportedly won by historical margins even though he never
made a single campaign appearance, and didn't even have a campaign website or any
literature, signs, or other evidence that he had actually spent any time campaigning for
the Democratic nomination to the U.S. Senate. When an unverifiable election system is
used, secondary evidence such as this becomes crucial in detection of election crimes and
anomalies.

South Carolnia’s Democratic Party Executive Board rejected Judge Rawl's contest of the
election results because he provided no hard evidence to "prove" that the results were
wrong. And why was there no hard evidence? Because the results were recorded on
electronic voting machines rather than on paper ballots. . . .

...snip

There were many other arguments put forward in the letter. I doubt Holder will do anything. The whole country is encased in a totally impervious suit of 100-ft thick metal when it comes to this issue, but one day some AG or some president, maybe even Congress, will outlaw these machines and restore American democracy.

Here's the link: http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/Holder_DRE_letter.pdf

[Scuba]

1. Excellent! Thanks.

[txlibdem]

2. Now we know how America will "vote in" a fascist dictatorship n/t

[BeFree]

3. Did vote in a dictator

Or at least the count was recorded as such.
Bush was a two-time loser.
And he acted like a dictator.



Been there, done that, and we'll do it again with the DREs