Our entire voting system is a fraud: EXPOSED

[cruise4]

Secretary of State that was caught by Bev and Susan on tape overseeing the broken custody chain?

I realize Bev and Susan likely have the original vid, but I urge (every) anybody to upload this smoking gun and wall paper the net.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKQEQ7qHvgM

[cruise4]

BLOGGED BY Brad Friedman ON 1/23/2008 8:12PM
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5598#more-5598

EXCLUSIVE: Kucinich Letter Cites Miscounts in NH, Requests State Carry Out 'Complete and Accurate Recount of All Ballots'
Democratic Presidential Candidate Details 'Significant Percentage Variances,' from 4 to 10%, Discovered So Far During Hand Counts as Paid for by His Campaign
SoS Downplays Mistallies After One County Counted: No Changes 'As Far as Where the Candidates Finished'...

Citing "significant percentage variances in four voting districts in Hillsborough County," Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is requesting that New Hampshire's Secretary of State, William Gardner, "order a complete and accurate recount of all ballots in the New Hamsphire Democratic Presidential Primary election," according to a letter sent this morning, as obtained by The BRAD BLOG.

The letter (posted in full at end of this article) details a number of the discrepancies revealed by the recent post-election hand count in Concord, as paid for by the Democratic Presidential candidate's campaign.

The count was suspended this morning, when "funds ran out," according to the NH SoS website, making way for a Republican hand count challenge by candidate Albert Howard to begin tomorrow, as The BRAD BLOG reported earlier today.

"The magnitude of the variances in the four voting locations raise questions about the integrity of the internal vote accounting procedures in use in Hillsborough County," wrote Kucinich. "A reconciliation of the records of votes cast to voters who signed in and received ballots should have detected these problems; why multiple locations with large over-voting discrepancies went undetected in Hillsborough remains unexplained."

Kucinich's references, detailed in the two-page letter, refer to counts in Nashua Ward 5 where there were variances discovered in the counting as high as 4.9%; in Manchester Ward 5 where tallies varied 10.6%; and in New Ipswich, which saw 7.5% differences in the hand count totals from the original count for one candidate. Those districts were all tabulated on Election Day solely by error-prone, hackable Diebold optical-scan voting systems.

As well, the hand counts revealed 100 fewer votes actually existed for Barack Obama, in the town of Wilton, than were actually recorded for him on the night of the election...


80% of New Hampshire's paper ballots are counted on the same Diebold optical-scan system used to hack a mock election, as seen in HBO's documentary, Hacking Democracy (watch the hack live here). New Hampshire has no human verification procedures for the machine-counted ballots. The rest of the state's paper ballots are counted by hand at the polling places on Election Night.

It has been reported that the explanation for the large variances in Manchester 5 and Nashua 5 were due to clerical errors when Vice-Presidential write-in votes were mixed up with Presidential votes, though Kucinich questions the explanation offered by local news affiliate WMUR, in his letter to SoS Gardner.

As of 10:00 PM EST on January 20, the New Hampshire Secretary of State reports 462 Democratic Vice Presidential primary votes were cast in Manchester Ward 5. However, the method by which 462 votes for two Vice Presidential candidates could accidentally have been recorded as 151 extra votes for 5 Democratic candidates for President within the same ward though a manual error was not further explained.

Yesterday, Wired's Kim Zetter tried to clear up some of the confusion about those numbers, as they were explained to her by Nashua's Town Clerk Paul Bergeron. The clerk from Manchester had yet to return her call before she filed her article. We'll refer you over there for Bergeron's explanation.

Whether the explanation for those errors is accurate or not --- we've not confirmed them one way or another --- what's clear is that the many variances in the vote counts discovered in just the single county to be counted so far would not likely have come to light were in not for the Kucinich-funded hand count.

Despite disparities from the original Diebold machine counts found across virtually all candidates, and in all wards counted so far, the New Hampshire Secretary of State's office has been downplaying the miscounts.

"None of the results, as far as where the candidates finished, changed," Assistant Secretary of State David Scanlan is quoted telling AP today. "There were minimal changes in the different voting precincts. Where there were differences beyond one or two votes, we were able to explain them" as human error, he reportedly said.

Aside from the large errors referenced, there were many wards where tallies were discovered to be beyond "one or two votes," as seen on the NH SoS own "Recount Results" web page. We've posted a graphic snap-shot at the bottom of the article, of the mistabulations discovered for the three leading candidates, as of late last week.

Kucinich concludes his letter by writing that the "narrow margins of the statewide outcome" warrant a "manual verification of the remainder of the votes" before alluding to Gardner's earlier refusal to allow for the counting of the unvoted ballots. The campaign had requested such a reconciliation count before the process even began.

"Whenever there are indications of over-voting, an accounting of spoiled and unused blank ballots is also justified," penned Kucinich in closing, before requesting "thoughtful consideration and determination" on these points from Gardner.

As well, the SoS has failed to supply copies of the Election Day poll books. Counting the signatures in those books would allow the hand count observers to reconcile whether or not there are the same number of ballots as voters in each jurisdiction.

As The BRAD BLOG has reported in great detail over the past week, serious, related chain of custody issues have emerged since the counting began in New Hampshire.

In addition to the decision to disallow the counting of unvoted and spoiled ballots, photographs and video taken by Election Integrity experts on the ground in New Hampshire have detailed the horrendous, unsecured shape in which boxes of ballots are being transported back to Concord for counting. Photographs detail unsealed boxes, in very poor condition, with openings large enough to easily reach in for the removal or addition of ballots.

It's also been shown that so-called "security seals" used on the boxes, as well as to secure the count room where ballots were stored last Thursday night, can be easily peeled away, removed and then restored without detection.

Also, as we reported when the count began, despite a federal law which requires the retention of all related media for 22 months after an election, Gardner has admitted that he has no idea what has become of the sensitive Diebold memory cards which are used in each machine to read ballots and store vote tabulation. Such a card was used to hack the mock election seen in Hacking Democracy. And the totals printed out from data on those cards, at the end of polling, are used to determine the official state tallies.

The BRAD BLOG has spoken to a number of Kucinich representatives throughout the day, in trying to determine whether or not they will pay for counting to resume at a later date. While we've received different answers from the different people we have spoken to, the answer to that question may lie in Gardner's response to Kucinich's letter.

We will continue to bring you more information, as soon as we can offer any definitive, on the record, statements from the campaign.

The 1/23/08 letter from Rep. Dennis Kucinich to New Hampshire Secretary of State William Gardner follows in full below...

http://www.bradblog.com/Images/Kucinich_Gardner_NHLetter_012208_page1.jpg

[cruise4]

Did Ron Paul Win The Louisiana Caucus?
Complications and botched ballots have led many to believe that the Congressman actually came out as the top candidate on Tuesday

Steve Watson
Infowars.net
Friday, Jan 25, 2008

Libertarian commentators and Ron Paul supporters, as well as the campaign itself, are suggesting that the thorough botching of the election process during the Louisiana caucus last Tuesday may have robbed the Texas Congressman of his first victory in the race for the 2008 presidency.

The Ron Paul campaign issued a statement yesterday charging the Louisiana GOP with failure to properly determine voter eligibility, and calling on the LAGOP to count all the ballots submitted in the caucus:

“The failure of the Louisiana GOP to properly determine who was and wasn’t eligible to vote threw this entire process into disarray,” said Ron Paul campaign manager Lew Moore. “The party needs to correct this mistake by counting all the votes immediately, and releasing the results.”

The LAGOP released "preliminary" results of the caucus on Late Wednesday with a carefully worded press release staing that "Delegate candidates endorsed by US Senator John McCain (R-AZ) appear to have won more state convention delegate positions than any other presidential slate at the Louisiana Caucuses."

This gave the impression that McCain won the caucus with Paul in second. But as the party then had to explain, due to its own mistakes, some 500-650 voters over five different districts were forced to file provisional ballots which could change the outcome of the entire election.

As the Ron Paul campaign statement makes clear, party officials admitted that caucus locations relied on a voter list dating from November 1, 2007 despite the fact that under caucus rules, voters had until November 30, 2007 to register as Republicans. The Louisiana Secretary of State reported that a huge 2,709 Louisiana residents registered as Republican between November 1, 2007 and November 30, 2007.

Many Ron Paul supporters had not changed parties by the 1st but had done so by the 30th deadline.

This also meant that many state-certified Ron Paul delegates that were on the ballot were forced to file a provisional ballot despite the fact they were pre-approved as delegates.

To add insult to injury, the LAGOP also changed the extremely complicated rules at the last minute to allow other candidates to file more delegates. The original deadline for filing delegates was January 10 and at that time Ron Paul had the largest number pledged to him. The party then changed the rules to give other candidates two more days to file delegates.

It is still unknown how many delegates Ron Paul has won (it is rumored to be between five and ten) but the 500-650 provisional ballots could swing another 20 or so national delegates Ron Paul's way. Somewhere in the region of 30 delegates out of Louisiana would put the Congressman in second or third nationwide, meaning the caucus has a massive significance.

Also of significance is the fact that McCain did not actually "win" the caucus. The "Reagan delegate slate", otherwise known as the "Pro-Life/Pro-Family delegate slate" won the majority of all delegates -- all of whom are uncommitted to any candidate, which is a story in itself.

A party source from one of the precincts in Louisiana has also stated that more than a few of his acquaintances were actually recorded for more than one candidate. Some were on handbills for McCain, Romney, and Uncommitted. This overlap can be seen on the following handbills featuring the various "slates."

Read more and DIGG/Reddit/Propel! here:
http://www.infowars.net/articles/january2008/250108Win.htm

[cruise4]

http://usera.imagecave.com/markyannone2/YannoneBlog11/Candidates1.jpg

[cruise4]

The message from Bev Harris as linked above :
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-auth.cgi?file=/1954/71572.html


We have collected over 20 hours of video taken by six different people. It will tell much of the story of the New Hampshire recount.

After some thought, I think the best way to do this is with as little editing as possible, to allow viewers to reach their own conclusions based on what they see. I will organize clips into uniform topics and will keep them short, with a few captions to provide context.

Links will appear on the Black Box Voting home page. For those of you who receive automatic e-mails, I'll post an announcement with a link when each new video goes up.

While Sec. State Bill Gardner may win the prize for the most circuitous and nonresponsive answers, ballot guy David Scanlan will win the award for belligerence.

THE NEW HAMPSHIRE CHAIN OF CUSTODY SHAM

I posted this one first because I was so haunted by New Hampshire Secretary of State Bill Gardner's demeanor and the expression on his face on the night he chose not to put the ballots in the vault. This 6-minute video contains three related clips: Frank Mevers, who holds a key to the ballot vaults, describing that the white tape seals the boxes; Sec. State Bill Gardner along with Frank Mevers, Brian Burford and Karen Ladd, as he is questioned about the decision not to use the vault; and a demonstration of the sham seal.

Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKQEQ7qHvgM

PARTICIPANTS

The first voice you hear, questioning Mevers about the seal, is that of Paddy Shaffer of the Ohio Election Justice Project.

The voice questioning Bill Gardner over the decision not to use the vault is mine. The voice telling him he did not answer the question is Sally Castleman of Election Defense Alliance.

Susan Pynchon (Florida Fair Elections Coalition) and I chased the ballot van on Jan. 17; on Jan. 22, Vickie Karp (Vote Rescue) and I chased the van, and on Jan. 23, due to speeding and evasive maneuvers by the ballot van, two teams followed the van with video cameras: Team one, Vickie Karp and Jeannie Dean (Sarasota, Florida); Team Two, me and Kathy Greenwell (Bullitt County, Kentucky.)

HOW WE CAME TO FIND BALLOT BOXES AND A SUPPLY BOX"

We returned to the archive building to wait for Butch and Hoppy to return the ballots they'd picked up. We were shocked to see that the building appeared to be deserted, but was unlocked, and the counting room was unlocked, and contained empty ballot boxes and a supply box with seals, tape etc.

When we left, a small car literally ran us out of the parking lot all the way to the road. It was not a security professional, but one of the workers in the archive building. About 15 minutes after we left, Butch and Hoppy arrived to deliver the ballots. No citizen witnesses were present, nor was the candidate notified so he could have his own witnesses.

FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE POLICE

In order to determine whether there were ballots in the boxes or not, I gently nudged the boxes with my shoe. The light weight indicated the ballot boxes were empty. At least one ballot box, for the town of Plaistow, contained the original sham seal signed by the moderator and selectmen. It was empty.

It was my decision to demonstrate the sham seals on videotape. I will be happy to reimburse the state of New Hampshire for the $1 or so cost for the sham "seal", since I used a blank seal on an empty box. Of course, as you will see in the video above, these seals are reusable, worthless, and fraudulent.

I would not have performed the demonstration had the state of New Hampshire complied with my requests to show me whether the seals adhere. I requested this of Deputy Sec. State Anthony Stevens, of Assistant Sec. State Dave Scanlan, and of Sec. State Bill Gardner. They each declined to demonstrate the removability of the seal, but did claim that the removable paper "sealed" the ballot boxes and amazingly, used the fraudulent "seal" to secure the DOOR TO THE ROOM WHERE BALLOTS WERE STORED OVERNIGHT. My demonstration was the only way to achieve the exposure of their lies, and clearly in the public interest.

The police interrogated Vickie Karp and Jeannie Dean today about this. They were present, at least for part of the demo. They were not involved in the decision or the act of testing the seal. The decision to demonstrate the "seal" fraud was mine and only mine.

I have so far been unable to find out who ordered these seals, since not a soul at the New Hampshire secretary of state's office claims to know who's responsible for the fraudulent seals.

UPCOMING VIDEO CLIPS

As I say, stay tuned for the video clips. They show employees for the state of New Hampshire breaking the law, and also will show you tips for how to investigate chain of custody yourselves.

Check back often over the next three days for new video installments.