Jump to content

Latest fraud updates


Rick Munroe
This topic is 6587 days old and is no longer open for new replies.  Replies are automatically disabled after two years of inactivity.  Please create a new topic instead of posting here.  

Recommended Posts

From Black Box Voting :

 

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting has launched a fraud audit into Florida. Three investigators (Bev Harris, Andy Stephenson, and Kathleen Wynne) are in Florida right now. We will initiate hand counts on selected counties that have not fully complied with our Nov. 2 Freedom of Information request by Monday (Diebold counties) or Tuesday (other counties).

 

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: We have reports that both David Cobb (Green Party) and Michael Badnarik (Libertarian Party) will be filing for official recounts in Ohio. Black Box Voting is also launching a fraud audit in Ohio.

 

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is implementing fraud diagnostics on the state of New Mexico. Information we recently received is indicative of widespread vote manipulation. We are not going to publicize the specifics here.

 

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is requesting legal assistance for a specific county in Georgia. Indications of corrupt voting processes, with possible criminal actions by local officials.

 

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on Pima County Arizona.

 

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting is launching a fraud investigation on the state of Nevada. Pro bono legal help certified to practice in Nevada, needed immediately. Multiple irregularities. Need people to take affidavits from election workers, statewide.

 

BREAKING -- FRIDAY NOV 12 2004: Ralph Nader to audit Diebold machines in New Hampshire. According to Nader, the current situation with voting machines warrants investigation. Several elements make voting machines "probative" for investigation, according to Nader, a consumer affairs lawyer: proprietary ownership, secret code, vested interests, a high-value reward, and lack of any real consequences, or likelihood of getting caught, for vote manipulation. "We are told that shenanigans are just politics," said Nader at a press conference on Nov. 10. "Well, it's not politics. It's taking away people's votes."

 

What is a fraud audit?

A fraud audit is not the same as a recount. It does not presume innocence. It does not make the assumption that if there is an anomaly with a benign explanation, it's okay to stop investigating. Any embezzler (or vote manipulator) worth his salt will build in an explanation that makes it sound like it could be an honest mistake, or a "glitch." Any investigator worth his salt knows you have to look deeper.

 

Forensic auditing begins with indicators, like oddball statistics, mismatched records, or secretive, obstructive behavior. The next step is to obtain diagnostic documents. Later steps may include pulling all the ballots for hand recounts.

 

Bev Harris, founder of Black Box Voting, has interfaced with law enforcement, including the FBI, state attorneys-general, the IRS, local police, and banking authorities, in several previous investigations during her work as an investigative writer. Her methods for isolating fraud have resulted in convictions or settlements from embezzlers and financial fraudsters. Black Box Voting is the first publicly funded, independent consumer protection group to investigate this election using forensic auditing methods.

 

You may have seen recent stories in the media (ABC News, Salon.com), and at other voting integrity Web sites like VerifiedVoting.org, telling you there is no reason to believe suspicions of fraud in the 2004 election. In fact, no member of the media nor any organization has done any real forensic auditing to determine whether there was or was not fraud. Trust in our electoral process is critical to our democracy. We need the right kind of investigation into anomalies, using appropriate methods.

 

"Feel-good" statements, dismissive of real concerns into voting integrity, are not responsible. The truth is what it is. We might see something very uncomfortable unfold during these investigations. Or, maybe not. It's still too early to tell, but the evidence is mounting.

 

To read more or to donate money to help fund investigations, go to http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>It's not a matter of who won or lost. It's a matter of

>making sure our votes are counted and that the system's

>integrity (and democracy itself) is restored and maintained.

 

Do you feel the same about Chicago votes in the Kennedy election? Should we review that too?

 

Or are you only concerned when you lose?

 

Curiously yours,

 

FFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry that you(like most freepers)find the persuit of a fair election such a bore.

To me it is much more engaging than looking at the LYING THIEVING TRAITORS who have stolen another election and watching them scheme to erode our civil liberties,run the US into the ground financially,and plunder developing nations to line the pockets of a few of thier "friends"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Are we really suppose to take you seriously when you can't

>even spell?

 

It's actually spelled "supposed," not "suppose." Bigguy's error was probably a typo (as transposed letters often are) but your mistake is a typical one made by people who don't realize that the phrase is "supposed to" because you're thinking it's spelled the way it sounds, and you can't hear the "d" at the end of "supposed" because of the 't' which follows it. It's the same as when people write "I would of..." instead of "I would have"...you're spelling it the way it sounds.

 

But don't worry; you haven't lost any credibility here. :7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>They stole one election-and I am SURE this one was fixed

>also

>FFF your little frepper flips are not cute nor funny.

>THE ELIMINATION OF ALL DOUBT REGARDING THIS ELECTION IS

>CRUCIAL,and should be important to every person who holds true

>democracy dear-regardless of party.

 

Regardless of party? You still can't believe you lost four years ago. And you definately, definately lost this time. Take a bunch of valium and wake up maybe four years from now. Perhaps you will get better news (but I doubt it)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YES you must take me seriously,as I am the nagging voice of reason that has plagued the "powers that be",that-something is not right here that haunted shrub and his cohorts.One of those pesky liberals that just won't go away.

And my voice of dissonance is not to be silenced-it is the back bone of democracy.

I know shrub and his friends wish we would just go away-but that ain't gonna happen.

Now go fuck yourself you silly snapqueen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>YES you must take me seriously,as I am the nagging voice of

>reason that has plagued the "powers that be",that-something is

>not right here that haunted shrub and his cohorts.One of those

>pesky liberals that just won't go away.

>And my voice of dissonance is not to be silenced-it is the

>back bone of democracy.

>I know shrub and his friends wish we would just go away-but

>that ain't gonna happen.

>Now go fuck yourself you silly snapqueen.

 

Silliest answer I ever heard. And I am supposed to take this seriously?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now,now Nellies...the whole gay world isn't a nasty, negative, screaming bitch!! There might even be something to be said for a reasoned, sensible and rational argument presented (god forbid) in a masculine tone. We are after all the self-proclaimed community of diversity. Let's call back just a slice of our presence in the world from femmy, self-absorbed screamers and hope for the best... Loathing? Maybe, but not of myself...:p

 

Pece,

 

Kipp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>>Are we really suppose to take you seriously when you

>can't

>>even spell?

>

>It's actually spelled "supposed," not "suppose."

 

 

I LOVE doing that to you guys!

 

You have no idea how long it took me to to think of the right phrase to use where I could plant a tiny mistake like that. I knew it would put someone in a swivet.

 

SUCKER!

 

Mischeveously yours,

 

FFF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>You have no idea how long it took me to to think of the right

>phrase to use where I could plant a tiny mistake like that.

 

So, in a post where you were ridiculing someone else's misspelling, you purposely misspelled a word so that your own post would be more pointless than usual. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. :7

 

(By the way, you have spelled it "suppose to" in previous posts...what was the reason those other times? :7 )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

In order to post in the Political Issues forum, all members are required to acknowledge that their post is in compliance with our Community Guidelines.  In addition, you acknowledge that it meets the following requirements: 

  • No personal attacks: Attack the issue not the person
  • No hijacking: Stay on the subject of the thread 

  • No bullying, hate speech or offensive terms/expressions

In addition, if the moderators feel someone is reporting content simply because if it’s political stance (such as but not limited to reporting it as off topic but not other off topic replies by those that agree with your stance), the reporting person may receive a warning as well.

Content that does not comply with the above requirements will be removed.  Multiple violations may result in a loss of access to this forum.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...