• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The usual Kevin election post.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The usual Kevin election post.

Kevin_Lowe said:
Well, Rep. John Conyers apparently sent a letter to "both the FBI Special agent in charge in Ohio and the Hocking County Prosecutor" asking them to investigate this incident. Whatever those two people are - I'm not clued up on what roles those people play in the US legal system.

The bottom line is that whatever the cover story for fiddling around with the machinery was and whether or not it turns out to be plausible, this guy (Michael Barbian, Jr.) showed up as a representative of a voting machine company to provide advice on falsifying recount data.



Link: http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=495

It would be nice if the FBI picked the guy up and grilled him, but then again my knowledge of US police procedure comes entirely from TV and film. So I don't know if they will do that.

It's my understanding these type of incidents are first investigated by local and not federal authoraties.

At any rate, what's going on with the investigationg?
 
Ed said:
Why the hell would the winner care? If it were reversed they would look and, lo, they would be there.
It doesn't matter if the winner cares or not.

Infractions were found by neutral people, without investigating.

Infractions favoring Bush only.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The usual Kevin election post.

The Central Scrutinizer said:
document the first instance where a voting infraction on Novemeber 2nd. did benefit Bush.
...
Really?
Kevin_Lowe said:

...
There's plenty of hard evidence of suspicious behaviour, but you'd know that if you'd read all the links you said you did. Spurious terrorist threats justifying lockdowns in Ohio, destruction and falsification of voting records in Volusia, the recent eyewitness affidavit of Triad employees fiddling with voting computers before a recount and coaching electoral officials on how to falsify the recount, any number of "glitches" that have thrown votes to Republican candidates and which remain unexplained except as "glitches", Curtis' testimony that Florida Republicans were looking into rigging voting machines as early as 2000, recalcitrance at both the government and corporate levels regarding attempts to institute or mandate paper trails,...
...
The Central Scrutinizer said:

...
(Note: I made no attempt to repair Ion's horrible spelling, grammar or punctuation in my reply.)
I agree, I think you should stick with what you are good at:
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Arf arf!!!
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The usual Kevin election

The Central Scrutinizer said:
Yes, really...
Really.
 
Ion said:
It doesn't matter if the winner cares or not.

Infractions were found by neutral people, without investigating.

Infractions favoring Bush only.

And where did they look? Did they discriminate between precincts or did they randomly sample? Did they know what they were looking for before they started looking? Did they happen to do an actual census of all precincts?

Let me guess: They cherry picked and found problems. Big deal. If they are serious they will examine every precinct. When they do that let me know.
 
Ed said:
And where did they look?...
Nowhere.

Infractions popped out.

Like terrorists threats in Ohio during the election, that turned out to be fictious and allowed for lockdown and time to manipulate the database.
No wonder the exit poll in Ohio on November 2nd. at 5 p.m. with a few hours left for voting, 60% Kerry to 40% Bush, got skewed into a Bush victory.
I guess exit polls indicate voting fraud in Ukraine and Venezuela, but 'not' in Ohio.

Like the election official for the recount in Ohio, a neutral who found a Triad's employee manipulating voting equipment to be against the rule specifying that bi partisan observers have to be present when voting equipment is altered, and who found the coaching by Triad on falsifying the recount data against the law.
 
Ion said:
Nowhere.

Infractions popped out.

Like terrorists threats in Ohio during the election, that turned out to be fictious and allowed for lockdown and time to manipulate the database.
No wonder the exit poll in Ohio on November 2nd. at 5 p.m. with a few hours left for voting, 60% Kerry to 40% Bush, got skewed into a Bush victory.
I guess exit polls indicate voting fraud in Ukraine and Venezuela, but 'not' in Ohio.

Like the election official for the recount in Ohio, a neutral who found a Triad's employee manipulating voting equipment to be against the rule specifying that bi partisan observers have to be present when voting equipment is altered, and who found the coaching by Triad on falsifying the recount data against the law.

Dammit!!! The idiot stumbled across our plot! Now we will have to kill him!!!!

Translation for Ion: it will stunble for the recount. your liiife is in danger1
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The usual Kevin e

The Central Scrutinizer said:
So where is your evidence?
In United States.
 
Ed said:
And where did they look? Did they discriminate between precincts or did they randomly sample? Did they know what they were looking for before they started looking? Did they happen to do an actual census of all precincts?

Let me guess: They cherry picked and found problems. Big deal. If they are serious they will examine every precinct. When they do that let me know.

A few observations.

Firstly, it is a "big deal" if people cherry pick and find errors or oddities of sufficient size to cast doubt on the outcome of any election. It's totally ridiculous to plug your head into the sand at that point and say "What does that prove? I will pay no attention to this unless they also prove that there was no cheating by the other side to balance it all out". Apart from the usual problems of proving global negatives, it should simply be unacceptable that there is any reasonable doubt about the legitimacy of any election.

Secondly, Ed, I think you are making a misguided criticism by judging an audit by the standards of a psychology experiment. In an audit you don't set up a control group (what would it be?) and then conduct an experiment. You relentlessly poke and prod anything that looks suspicious until either all suspicious phenomena have been explained or until you flush out a rat. Rats have already been flushed in Florida and Ohio and it is early days yet. You can't handwave those rats away by saying "I'm sure that you could flush some other rats elsewhere, if you really wanted to" if the goal is a rat-free system.

Thirdly, it's very much worth pointing out that not all rats or even all rat-holes have been linked to Republican shenanigans beyond reasonable doubt. The Ohio technician could have been covering up pro-Democrat election rigging for all we know for certain.

I suspect people are starting to assume that electronic fraud is of Republican origin because so many rats and ratholes have led back to the Republican party one way or another. That could be partisan bias or it could be simple induction, but either way it's not proof that all naughtiness favoured the Republican party this time.
 
Kevin_Lowe said:
A few observations.

Firstly, it is a "big deal" if people cherry pick and find errors or oddities of sufficient size to cast doubt on the outcome of any election. It's totally ridiculous to plug your head into the sand at that point and say "What does that prove? I will pay no attention to this unless they also prove that there was no cheating by the other side to balance it all out". Apart from the usual problems of proving global negatives, it should simply be unacceptable that there is any reasonable doubt about the legitimacy of any election.



I suspect people are starting to assume that electronic fraud is of Republican origin because so many rats and ratholes have led back to the Republican party one way or another. That could be partisan bias or it could be simple induction, but either way it's not proof that all naughtiness favoured the Republican party this time.

It's not a question of experiemental control, it's a question of cherry picking. Cherry picking is bias. If there are serious irregularities, the entire state should be recounted before fingers are pointed.

I am certainly not saying "What does that prove? I will pay no attention to this unless they also prove that there was no cheating by the other side to balance it all out". Never said it, have no idea where the quote came from. What I am saying is that sh!t is in fact going to happen and if it looks like it is beyond the usual election year cock ups the whole thing ought to be examined closely. I also said that most losers want to cry "foul" whether they do or not.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The usual

The Central Scrutinizer said:
Maybe someday you can come here. But you have to learn English first!!!!!!!!
To come to United States from United States?

Scrotchy,

you don't understand much, I am in US, and you the native American you need to learn English.

Spelling properly words like gullible, using upper case letters when starting statements, getting rid of juvenile exclamation marks, you have long ways to go in English.
 
Ed said:
It's not a question of experiemental control, it's a question of cherry picking. Cherry picking is bias. If there are serious irregularities, the entire state should be recounted before fingers are pointed.
...
Cherry picking is what Secretary of State Blackwell is doing for the recount in Ohio.

In another forum, somebody is an observer to the recount in Ohio, and he posted that he tried to do the recount statewide, or at least to do the recount randomly, but Blackwell cherry picked his selected precints.

Also, Blackwell delayed the certification of Ohio, a few days before the electors of Ohio met and not leaving time for the recount to be done before the meeting of the electors.
 
Grammatron said:

At any rate, what's going on with the investigationg?

Kalo, and the Green Party’s recount coordinator for Southeastern Ohio, Orren Whiddon, both point out that the issue in Hocking is not so much what was or wasn’t done to the machine, but the efforts of the Triad man to find out which of Hocking’s precincts was to be subjected to the mandatory 3% hand recount.

One of our producers had asked Deputy Prosecutor Sams about how the subject of the unusual inquiries was dealt with at the informal “board meeting” Sams conducted Monday. Asked why the Triad employee would’ve asked about precincts at all, Mr. Sams replied, “I don’t remember, to be honest, what he answered to that. But it was really just a comedy of errors. There was no impropriety.”

Both Mr. Kalo and Mr. Whidden spoke highly of Sams, but suggest he missed the point. The Green Party rep notes that Ohio law is specific about the 3% sample that must be hand recounted in each county: it’s supposed to be selected randomly. If the effort is made — either by an election official, or somebody else (like a manufacturer’s rep) — to decide in advance which 3% of the vote is to be recounted, the concept of random selection is thoroughly contaminated and once again, a puff of smoke rises from the entire recount process.

Mr. Whidden told me by phone this afternoon that there are a lot of puffs of smoke. “86 of Ohio’s 88 counties have pre-selected their random precincts,” he claims. Their motivations — and even Triad’s — may not be as nefarious as would appear. Ohio law states that if the 3% hand recount doesn’t match the original vote, the entire County’s vote must be recounted by hand. These County Board of Elections, especially in the smaller jurisdictions, are comprised largely of volunteers, and a full, hand recount means an incredible amount of work, which as human nature would suggest, they’d prefer to avoid.

Unfortunately, it also means that if you were trying to fix a vote in Ohio, or cover it up in a recount, you had merely to identify which precincts were least likely to be chosen (rather than randomly selected), and do your dirty work in them.

Which brings us back to Triad and what its rep was doing, trying to find out which precincts in Hocking would be recounted by hand, and offering tips to help make sure the recount matched the original vote. “Highly respected company,” Whidden notes. “Triad has a rule against corporate donations to political parties; their employees may, but they don't. Not a Diebold situation. They answer questions openly. They believe in customer service.” The problem arises when the customer service, even innocently, dovetails with the same mechanism that guarantees that the precinct selection isn’t random, and full hand recounts don’t occur.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/
 
Ion said:
Cherry picking is what Secretary of State Blackwell is doing for the recount in Ohio.

There are certainly some worrying things going on with the recount. The single most disturbing aspect to me is that Blackwell seems to be getting away with reprogramming voting machines to only count the presidential vote, and not recount the other races.

There are two huge issues here. The first is that it gives the voting machine companies involved, all of whom are under some degree of suspicion, a chance to fiddle with the voting machines as they modify the software. The second is that it makes it far easier to stuff ballot boxes in the initial 3% recount and get away with it. If you fraudulently switched 600 Kerry votes to Bush, for example, you could cover that up in the initial recount by grabbing 600 Bush ballots from a mate in the next precinct over and using them to replace 600 Kerry ballots. That would show up as discrepancies in other races though, more than likely, but if you make sure that only the Presidential votes are counted it's much harder to get caught.

There is circumstancial evidence this happened in Cuyhahoga County, site of much suspicion, since multiple witnesses have stated that in some places the votes that were recounted were already divided into stacks of Kerry votes and Bush votes before the hand recount. That is either a staggering coincidence or evidence that there was a previous hand count no one knew about, which would be illegal in itself. What seems likely is that someone had already been through the votes before the recount to make certain that they came out "right".

What's the motive for all this? Well, given this and the recent shenanigans in Hocking County it seems that the Republicans want the 3% hand recount to come out looking okay so they can count the other 97% of votes using machines. Figure out for yourself why they might want this...

More Ohio fun: The people pushing the Moss vs Bush lawsuit want Blackwell and other key figures to testify under oath. For some strange reason they are not keen put themselves in a position where lying has immediate legal consequences.

On December 21, notice of depositions were sent to President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell to appear and give testimony regarding the legal challenge of Ohio's elections results in the case Moss v Bush et al.

But Republican Blackwell's attorney at the Secretary of State’s office told the attorneys issuing the notice of deposition and subpoena that Blackwell will not testify under oath. The Republican-controlled Attorney General's office has labeled any attempt to put Blackwell under oath, "harassment." Blackwell supervised the November 2 vote in Ohio at the same time he served as co-chair of the state's Bush-Cheney campaign.

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1015

It takes some brass to call it "harassment" to have to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth to the citizenry.

Here's another, "balanced" take on the Ohio situation:

http://www.athensnews.com/issue/article.php3?story_id=19237

And finally, the Pravda's take. "Biased" as hell of course.

All I'll say is that I find it amusing that the US media is happy to portray Russia as a corrupt oligarchy run by rich gangsters, which it probably is, but only the Russian media is game to say that the USA is a corrupt oligarchy run by rich gangsters. Either way I think it has value as a snapshot of how the rest of the world sees the US situation, whether or not that viewpoint lines up with your own views about the nature of government in the USA.

http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/14741_treason.html
 
Frank Newgent said:
Which brings us back to Triad and what its rep was doing, trying to find out which precincts in Hocking would be recounted by hand, and offering tips to help make sure the recount matched the original vote. “Highly respected company,” Whidden notes. “Triad has a rule against corporate donations to political parties; their employees may, but they don't. Not a Diebold situation. They answer questions openly. They believe in customer service.” The problem arises when the customer service, even innocently, dovetails with the same mechanism that guarantees that the precinct selection isn’t random, and full hand recounts don’t occur.

Of course Kevin "Woo" Lowe claimed earlier in this thread that Triad was a "Republican-linked voting machine company". There was even an affidavit to prove it! I asked for evidence beyond that, and predictably, none was provided. The article above says they weren't. Since that is the only evidence we have to go by, we can assume that Woo-Lo is wrong. Again. Or did he get his evidence from Bev Harris, a certified liar?
 
Kevin_Lowe said:
There are two huge issues here. The first is that it gives the voting machine companies involved, all of whom are under some degree of suspicion, a chance to fiddle with the voting machines as they modify the software. The second is that it makes it far easier to stuff ballot boxes in the initial 3% recount and get away with it. If you fraudulently switched 600 Kerry votes to Bush, for example, you could cover that up in the initial recount by grabbing 600 Bush ballots from a mate in the next precinct over and using them to replace 600 Kerry ballots. That would show up as discrepancies in other races though, more than likely, but if you make sure that only the Presidential votes are counted it's much harder to get caught.

There is circumstancial evidence this happened in Cuyhahoga County, site of much suspicion, since multiple witnesses have stated that in some places the votes that were recounted were already divided into stacks of Kerry votes and Bush votes before the hand recount. That is either a staggering coincidence or evidence that there was a previous hand count no one knew about, which would be illegal in itself. What seems likely is that someone had already been through the votes before the recount to make certain that they came out "right".

What's the motive for all this? Well, given this and the recent shenanigans in Hocking County it seems that the Republicans want the 3% hand recount to come out looking okay so they can count the other 97% of votes using machines. Figure out for yourself why they might want this...

( Insert Twilight Zone music here )
 
The Central Scrutinizer said:
Of course Kevin "Woo" Lowe claimed earlier in this thread that Triad was a "Republican-linked voting machine company". There was even an affidavit to prove it!
...
No.

I told you already the affidavit was by a Hocking official who said that a Triad employee inquired about which precint was to do the 3% hand recount, manipulated a voting machine without bi partisan observers present, and coached election officials on how to falsify recount data.

All actions against the rules.

Is comprehension always difficult to you?
Because only losers in comprehension like you deserve a loser for President.
Normal people deserve better.
 

Back
Top Bottom