The Truth will prevail, but only if we demand it from Congress!

9-11 Inside Job and Neocons Hacked 2004

SCROLL DOWN

Home ] 9-11 Inside Job ] Federal Reserve ] Hacking Elections ] Iraq War ] Fake War on Terror ] New World Order ] Media ] Peak Oil-Petro Euros ] Fascism in U.S. ] Editorials ] About Us ] Links ] Contact Us ]

 

Home
Up

               

COMPUTER FRAUD SUMMARY

 

Condensed Version

 

How George Bush used computer fraud

to steal the election

 

1.  No Paper Trail

The Republicans passed the Voting Act in 2002 authorizing the use of electronic voting machines with no requirement that they produce a paper receipt (a “paper trail”), which would allow an ironclad, independent assessment of whether the DATA IN THE voting machines accurately reflected the votes cast.

2. Conservative Republican Owned Voting Machine Companies

The Bush administration then insured that the majority of these electronic voting machines were made by Diebold and ES&S. The President of one of these companies and the VP of the other are brothers. Both are staunch Republicans and Diebold contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican campaigns. The CEO of Diebold was Chairman of the Bush Reelection Campaign in Ohio , and promised to deliver the state of Ohio to George Bush in the 2004 election.

3. No Recounts Possible

Without the capability of generating a "paper trail", there is no way of having a recount of the votes as required by law.

4. Diebold Voting Machines Can Be Hacked.

Dr. Avi Rubin (Professor of Computer Science, John Hopkins University ) evaluated Diebold's source code, which runs their e-voting machines. Diebold voting machines use “Digital Encryption Standard”, whose code was broken in 1997 and is NO LONGER USED by anyone seriously interested in insuring that a computer is secure from tampering and hacking. Moreover, the KEY was IN the source code, such that all Diebold machines respond to the same key.  Unlock one, and you have then ALL unlocked.

5. According to an analysis of the 2004 Presidential election by Dr. Steven Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania

"…In ten of eleven consensus battleground states, the tallied margin differed from the predicted (exit poll) margin, and in every one, the shift favored Bush.” (See: “The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy” in “Scholarly Analyses” at shadowbox.i8.com/stolen.htm). The discrepancy favored Bush in Ohio (6.7%), Pennsylvania (6.5%) and Florida (4.9%), and, according to Dr. Freeman, the odds of this being due to random errors are 250 million-to-one.

 6.   No Government Oversight of Voting Machine Industry

Interestingly, no one in the U.S. federal government seems to be
paying attention . . . as usual. There is no federal agency that has
regulatory authority or oversight of the voting machine industry—not the
Federal Election Commission (FEC), not the Department of Justice (DOJ),
and not the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The FEC doesn't even have a complete list of all the companies that count votes in U.S. elections.
         

Once again we are witness to an "eyes closed, hands off" approach
to protecting America . The 2004 election rests in the private hands
of the Urosevich brothers, who are financed by the far-out right wing and
top donors to the Republican Party. The Democrats are either sitting
ducks or co-conspirators. I don't know which.

7. None or Criminally Negligent Government Oversight of Voting Machines

Your local elections officials trusted a group called NASED – the National Association of State Election Directors -- to certify that your voting system is safe.
This trust was breached. NASED certified the systems based on the recommendation of an"Independent Testing Authority" (ITA). What no one told local officials was that the ITA did not test for security (and NASED didn't seem to mind). The most important test on the ITA report is called the "penetration analysis." This test is supposed to tell us whether anyone can break into the system to tamper with the votes. "Not applicable," wrote Shawn Southworth, of Ciber Labs, the ITA that tested the Diebold GEMS central tabulator software. "Did not test."


8. Criminal Records of Diebold’s Senior Executives

Check this out - No less than 5 of Diebold's developers are convicted felons, including Senior Vice President Jeff Dean, and topping the list are his twenty-three counts of felony Theft in the First Degree. To sum up, he was convicted of 23 felony counts of theft by - get this - planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection. Do you trust computer systems designed by this man? Is trust important in electronic voting systems?

9. How Easy It Is to Change the Vote

On the other hand, the Central Vote Tabulation systems are a very inviting target – by simply compromising one Windows desktop, you could potentially influence tens or hundreds of thousands of votes, with only one attack to execute and only one attack to erase your tracks after. This makes for an extremely attractive target, particularly when one realizes that by compromising these machines you can affect the votes that people cast not only by the new touch screen systems, but also voters using traditional methods, such as optical scanning systems since the tallies from all of these systems are brought together for Centralized Tabulation. 

10. Why Votes Do Not Match Exit Poll

There are numerous examples in Florida and Ohio where the votes

do not match the exit polls but only in those precincts where

electronic voting machines with no paper trail were being used. All

of these discrepancies are in favor of George Bush by five to 15%

despite many of the precincts having a strong Democratic majority.

In those precincts where there was a machine with a "paper trail",

the exit polls matched almost exactly the actual vote.

11. Conclusion
The above are some of the lines that connect the dots of the Bush Conspiracy to steal 
this election. As Fox News’ "fair and balanced" Bill O'Reilly says repeatedly "we report, 
you decide".

 _______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________


Full Length Version

 

How George Bush used computer fraud

to steal the election

 

The following facts point clearly to George Bush, Karl Rove and the

rest of his "dirty political tricksters" stealing this election:

 

1. Bush's History of Lying

 

George Bush has lied, denied the truth and has been unwilling to

take responsibility for any mistakes on the part of his

administration on numerous occasions, including weapons

of mass destruction, Medicare prescription drugs, military record

and the war on Iraq .

 

2. Voting Act in 2002-No Paper Trail

 

The Republicans passed the Voting Act in 2002 authorizing the

use of electronic voting machines in presidential elections with no

requirement that they produce a paper receipt (Paper Trail"), which

would allow an ironclad, independent assessment of whether the

Data in The Voting Machines accurately reflected the votes cast.

Tom DeLay and other top Republicans fought very hard not to

include in this bill a requirement that the electronic voting machines

be ableto generate "a paper trail". The Democrats attempted to

require this in that bill but to no avail.

 

3. No Recounts Possible

 

Without the capability of generating a "paper trail", there is

no way of having a recount of the votes which is required by law.

 

4. Bush Hires Diebold and DS&S to Make Voting Machines

 

The Bush administration then insured that the maturity of these

electronic voting machines were made by Diebold and ES&S.

ES&S and Diebold clearly dominate the field. ES&S claims that

they have tabulated  "56 percent of the U.S. national vote for the

past four presidential elections", while a Diebold spokesperson

told this writer that the company processed about 35 percent of U.S.

electronic vote count in 2002.

The President of one of these companies and the VP of the other

are brothers. Both of them are staunch Republican supporters.

Diebold has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to the

Republican campaign. The CEO of Diebold has been at George's

ranch in Texas on numerous occasions. The CEO of Diebold within

the last year has publicly promised to deliver the state of Ohio to

George Bush in this election.

On April 22, 2004, Jim Wasserman of the Associated Press (AP)

reported, "By an 8-0 vote, the state's (California) Voting Systems

and Procedures Panel recommended that [Secretary of State]

Shelley cease the use of the machines, saying that Texas-based

Diebold has performed poorly in California and its machines

malfunctioned in the state's March 2 primary election, turning

away many voters in San Diego County . . . In addition to the

ban, panel members recommended that a secretary of state's

office report released Wednesday, detailing alleged failings of

Diebold in California, be forwarded to the state attorney general's

office to consider civil and criminal charges against the company."

 

Interestingly, no one in the U.S. federal government seems to be

paying attention . . . as usual. There is no federal agency that has

regulatory authority or oversight of the voting machine industry—

not the Federal Election Commission (FEC), not the Department

of Justice (DOJ), and not the Department of Homeland Security

(DHS). The FEC doesn't even have a complete list of all the

companies that count votes in U.S. elections.

Once again we are witness to an "eyes closed, hands off" approach to

protecting America. The 2004 election rests in the private hands of the

Urosevich brothers, who are financed by the far-out right wing and top

donors to the Republican Party. The Democrats are either sitting ducks

or co conspirators. I don't know which.

 

5. Diebold DES Code Broken in 1997

No agency hired by the federal government ever issued a report

indicating that these electronic voting machines manufactured by

Diebold and ES&S were secure from manipulation.

On the other hand, Dr. Avi Rubin, currently a Professor of Computer

Science at John Hopkins University "accidentally" got his hands on a

copy of the Diebold software program--Diebold's source code--which

runs their e-voting machines.

Dr. Rubin's students pored over 48,609 lines of code that make up

this software. One line in particular stood out over all the rest:

#defineDESKEY((des_KEY8F2654hd4").

All commercial programs have provisions to be encrypted so as

to protect them from having their contents read or changed by anyone

not having the key. The line that staggered the Hopkin's team was

that the method used to encrypt the Diebold machines was a method

called Digital Encryption Standard (DES), a code that was broken in

1997 and is NO LONGER USED by anyone to secure  programs.

F2654hd4 was the key to the encryption. Moreover, because the KEY

was IN the source code, all Diebold machines would respond to the

same key.  Unlock one, you have then ALL unlocked.

Professor Rubin's Study was published on the Internet in February,

2004. No Bush administration officials or government agencies ever

mentioned this report which clearly states that these electronic

voting machines are not suitable to be used in the upcoming election.

Bev Harris, of Black Box Voting, was videotaped with Democratic

presidential contender Howard Dean in March, 2004. On this

videotape entitled Votergate she and Howard Dean are able to hack

into the Diebold voting software and change the vote in 90 seconds.

Why weren't eyebrows raised by anyone in the government at this

point?

 

6. None or Criminally Negligent Government Oversight of Voting

Machines

Your local elections officials trusted a group called NASED – the

National Association of State Election Directors -- to certify that

your voting system is safe.

 

This trust was breached. NASED certified the systems based on the

recommendation of an "Independent Testing Authority" (ITA). What no

one told local officials was that the ITA did not test for security

(and NASED didn't seem to mind).

 

The ITA reports are considered so secret that even the California

Secretary of State's office had trouble getting its hands on one.

The ITA refused to answer any questions about what it does. Imagine

our surprise when, due to Freedom of Information requests, a couple

of them showed up in our mailbox.

 

The most important test on the ITA report is called the "penetration

analysis." This test is supposed to tell us whether anyone can break

into the system to tamper with the votes. "Not applicable," wrote

Shawn Southworth, of Ciber Labs, the ITA that tested the Diebold

GEMS central tabulator software. "Did not test."

 

This is Shawn Southworth, in his office in Huntsville, Alabama.

He is the man who carefully examines our voting software.

Shawn Southworth "tested" whether every candidate on the ballot has a

name. But we were shocked to find out that, when asked the most

important question -- about vulnerable entry points -- Southworth's

report says "not reviewed."

 

Ciber "tested" whether ballots comply with local regulations, but

when Bev Harris asked Shawn Southworth what he thinks about Diebold

tabulators accepting large numbers of "minus" votes, he said he

didn't mention that in his report because "the vendors don't like him

to put anything negative" in his report. After all, he said, he is paid by

the vendors.

 

Shawn Southworth didn't do the penetration analysis, but check out

what he wrote: "Ciber recommends to the NASED committee that

GEMS software version 1.18.15 be certified and assigned NASED

certification number N03060011815."

 

Maybe another ITA did the penetration analysis? Apparently not.

We discovered an even more bizarre Wyle Laboratories report.

In it, the lab admits the Sequoia voting system has problems, but

says that since they were not corrected earlier, Sequoia could

continue with the same flaws. You've gotta ask yourself: Are they

nuts? Some of them are computer experts. Well, it seems that

several of these people suddenly want to retire, and the whole

NASED voting systems board is becoming somewhat defunct,

but these are the people responsible for today's shoddy voting

systems.

 

If the security of the U.S. electoral system depends on you to

certify a voting system, and you get a report that plainly states

that security was "not tested" and "not applicable" -- what would

you do?

 

7. How Diebold and ES&S Began

Once upon a time there were two brothers: Bob and Todd Urosevich.

In the 1980's, with the financial backing of the right-wing extremist

Christian billionaire Howard Ahmanson, Bob and Todd founded a

company called American Information Systems (AIS) that built voting

machines. They were also certified to count votes.

 

It is interesting to note that back then there was no federal agency

with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine

industry. Even more interesting is the fact that this is still true

today.

Not even the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has a complete list

of all the companies that count votes in U.S. elections.

 

But let us get back to our story....

 

In 1992 a conservative Nebraskan fellow called Chuck Hagel became

chairman of AIS as well as chairman of the McCarthy Group, a private

investment bank. This all happened shortly after he stopped working

for Bush Sr.'s administration as Head of the Private Sector Council.

 

In 1995 Hagel resigned from AIS and a year later ran for Senate,

with the founder of the McCarthy Group as his campaign manager.

 

In 1996 Chuck Hagel became the first Republican to ever win a

Nebraska senatorial campaign in 24 years, carrying virtually every

demographic group, including African American precincts that had

never voted Republican. The only company certified to count votes

in Nebraska at the time was AIS.

 

In 2003 the Senate Ethics Committee forced Chuck Hagel to reveal the

fact that he had $1 million to $5 million in investment in the

McCarthy Group, a fact he'd previously neglected to mention. The

McCarthy Group also happens to be a major owner of ES&S.

 

 

8. Criminal Record of Voting Machine Companies Diebold

During the 2000 presidential elections, Diebold made 16,000

presidential votes "vanish" in several Florida county.

 

Back in 2002 Diebold supplied the state of Georgia with brand new

electronic voting machines. That was when incumbent Democratic

Governor Ray Barnes was defeated and the Republicans won for the

first time in 134 years. The poll results showed an amazing 12-point

shift that took place in the last 48 hours.

 

Diebold was subsequently sued for applying a last-minute code patch

to the machines that was never reviewed. In another strange turn of

events, that code was also deleted right after the election and the

suit fell through.

 

Earlier this year California sued Diebold for fraud and decertified

its voting machines.

 

Check this out - No less than 5 of Diebold's developers are

convicted felons, including Senior Vice President Jeff Dean, and

topping the list are his twenty-three counts of felony Theft in the

First Degree. According to the findings of fact in case no. 89-1-

04034-1:

 

"Defendant's thefts occurred over a 2 1/2 year period of time, there

were multiple incidents, more than the standard range can account

for, the actual monetary loss was substantially greater than typical

for the offense, the crimes and their cover-up involved a high

degree of sophistication and planning in the use and alteration of

records in the computerized accounting system that defendant

maintained for the victim, and the defendant used his position of

trust and fiduciary responsibility as a computer systems and

accounting consultant for the victim to facilitate the commission of

the offenses."

 

To sum up, he was convicted of 23 felony counts of theft from by -

get this - planting back doors in his software and using a "high

degree of sophistication" to evade detection. Do you trust computer

systems designed by this man? Is trust important in electronic

voting systems?

 

Sequoia America's second largest voting corporation is Sequoia Voting

Systems. This company is owned by the British company De La Rue,

who also owns 20% of the British National Lottery. In 1995 the SEC

 filed suit against Sequoia for inflating revenue and pre-tax profits.

In 1999 charges were filed by the Justice Department against Sequoia

in a massive corruption case that sent top Louisiana state officials to

jail for bribery, most of it funneled through the Mob. Sequoia's

executives were given immunity in exchange for testimony against

state officials.

 

9. How Easy It Is to Change the Vote

At greater risk than the individual touch screens are the Central

Voting Tabulation computers, which compile the results from many

other systems, such as touch screens and optically scanned cards.

From a hacker's standpoint, there are a couple of reasons why these

central computers are better targets:

 

a. It is extremely labor intensive to compromise a large number of

systems, and the chance of failure or being detected increases every

time an attack is attempted. Also, the controversy surrounding the

touch screen terminals ensures that their results will be closely

watched, and this theory has been born out in recent days.

 

b. If one were to compromise the individual terminals, they would

only be able to influence a few hundred to maybe a couple of

thousand votes. These factors create a very poor risk/reward ratio,

which is a key factor in determining which systems it makes sense to

attack.

 

c. On the other hand, the Central Vote Tabulation systems are a very

inviting target – by simply compromising one Windows desktop, you

could potentially influence tens or hundreds of thousands of votes,

with only one attack to execute and only one attack to erase your

tracks after. This makes for an extremely attractive target,

particularly when one realizes that by compromising these machines

you can affect the votes that people cast not only by the new touch

screen systems, but also voters using traditional methods, such as

optical scanning systems since the tallies from all of these systems

are brought together for Centralized Tabulation. This further helps

an attacker stay under the radar and avoid detection, since scrutiny

will not be as focused on the older systems, even though the vote

data is still very much at risk since it is all brought together at

a few critical points. This also has been born out by early

investigations, where the touch screen results seem to be fairly in

line with expectations, while some very strange results are being

reported in precincts still using some of the older methods.

 

10. Why Votes Do Not Match Exit Polls

There are numerous examples in Florida and Ohio where the votes

do not match the exit polls but only in those precincts where

electronic voting machines with no paper trail were being used. All

of these discrepancies are in favor of George Bush by five to 15%

despite many of the precincts having a strong Democratic majority.

In those precincts where there was a machine with a "paper trail",

the exit polls matched almost exactly the actual vote.

 

11. The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy --by Steven F. Freeman,

Ph.D.

"As much as we can say in social science that something is

impossible, it is impossible that the discrepancies between

predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical battleground

states [Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania] of the 2004 election could

have been due to chance or random error... The likelihood of any two

of these statistical anomalies occurring together is on the order of

one-in-a-million. The odds against all three occurring together are

250 million to one. As much as we can say in social science that

something is impossible, it is impossible that the discrepancies

between predicted and actual vote counts in the three critical

battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to

chance or random error."

 

12. Conservatives see a conspiracy here: They think the exit

polls were rigged.

Dick Morris, the infamous political consultant to the first Clinton

campaign who became a Republican consultant and Fox News regular,

wrote an article for The Hill, the publication read by every

political junkie in Washington, DC, in which he made a couple of

brilliant points.

 

"Exit Polls are almost never wrong," Morris wrote. "They eliminate

the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly

separating actual voters from those who pretend they will cast

ballots but never do and by substituting actual observation for

guesswork in judging the relative turnout of different parts of the

state."

 

He added: "So, according to ABC-TVs exit polls, for example, Kerry

was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, and

Iowa, all of which Bush carried. The only swing state the network

had going to Bush was West Virginia, which the president won by 10

points."

 

Yet a few hours after the exit polls were showing a clear Kerry

sweep, as the computerized vote numbers began to come in from the

various states the election was called for Bush.

 

13. Pre-Election Polls Were "Unexplainably Wrong" in the

2002 Midterm Elections and the Exit Polls Became Not

Operational at the Last Minute

The 2002 mid-term elections were viewed as a grand triumph for

George W. Bush since he ostensibly "defied" the tradition that

incumbent chief executives suffer losses in such contests.

In Minnesota Democrats were united behind Walter Mondale

as a replacement for the recently deceased Senator Paul Wellstone,

who had perished in a plane crash, against Democrat turned Republican

Norm Coleman.

 

After some tough moments Wellstone had weathered well-financed

 Republican onslaughts to secure a lead in the polls before his tragic

demise.

 

Those same polls found Mondale maintaining a lead going into Election

Day, upon which a big surprise was recorded and Coleman emerged

the winner Republican Senator Wayne Allard was running behind in

Colorado with the momentum going in the other direction. When the

results were revealed he, like Coleman, had won in a final surge that

the pollsters failed to detect. The identical phenomenon occurred in

New Hampshire, where popular Governor Jean Shaheen, who had

been on Al Gore's short list for the vice presidency in 2000, appeared

on her way to the U.S. Senate. The pollsters were once more revealed

to be dramatically wrong as John Sununu Jr. pulled through with another

one of those 2002 Republican final surges to nip his opponent at the wire.

 

The most widely observed case of Republicans seemingly clutching

victory from the jaws of defeat occurred in Georgia. This is the

state where Karl Rove enticed lackluster Congressman Saxby

Chambliss to run against Vietnam War hero and incumbent Senator

Max Cleland. Despite shameful television ads showing Cleland

alongside Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden the incumbent

appeared to have weathered the storm and was ahead in the polls,

as was Democratic Governor Roy Barnes. On Election Day the

Republicans had scored two more of those amazing come from

behind victories in the face of negative poll forecasts as Chambliss

and Republican gubernatorial candidate Sonny Perdue both won.

 

John Zogby had proven himself to be one of the nation's most

reliable pollsters in 2000, when he correctly analyzed Gore's final

surge and ultimate victory in the popular vote category, as well as

in the Electoral College but for the fraudulent efforts of Jeb Bush

and Katherine Harris in Florida and the decision of the U.S. Supreme

Court majority in Bush vs. Gore, in which Federalist Society partisans

Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas refused to recuse themselves

despite conflicts of interest.

 

It is interesting to note that the usually reliable Zogby along with

some of his professional colleagues, who had followed the

aforementioned senate races closely, were mysteriously off by

margins as high as 10 to 13 percent. These key races made the

difference as Republicans took control of the United States Senate

and Bush was saluted for his successful barnstorming on behalf of

Republican candidates.

 

Only 50,000 votes nationally kept the Democrats from controlling both

the House and the Senate in the 2002 elections. On election eve there

were (depending on which source you use) either thirteen or sixteen

House and Senate races still too close to call. In all cases, the last

polls before election day showed the Democratic candidates leading.

In all cases the Republican candidates won. This was an election first,

according to some election historians, and polling experts consulted

say they can't recall a time when the polls called all the close races

in an election wrong.

To compound the problems of the inaccurate polls and lack of paper trails

to refer back to, on the morning of election day the exit polling company

owned by a consortium of media news giants (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, MSNBC

among others) which has been providing exit polls on national elections for

years, suddenly announced there would be no exit polls done on this election

because "apparent quirks in our new software are providing anomalous results."

The lack of exit polls eliminates the one source of data which might be used

to validate reported vote totals; i.e., if in exit polls sixty eight percent

say they voted for candidate A and the vote counts only show candidate A getting

forty two percent of the vote, the discrepancy would be cause for investigation.

Finally, a visit to votewatch.us (a web site created to be a repository for reports

of voting problems across the U.S.) reveals an extensive nationwide pattern of

problems with the vote count in 2002, ranging from a Texas race where the Republican

candidate's win in a Democratic district was overturned after a suspicious election

director demanded new machine chips be installed and recounted the vote coming up

this time with a Democratic landslide, to numerous reports of voters in Florida

trying to vote an all Democratic ticket on the new touch screen machines, and

having their votes register as all Republican instead. One lady reported poll

workers had her try four machines before her all Democratic vote was accepted.

Meanwhile, she said, the other machines continued to be used for voting.

There were no reports of voters trying to vote all Republican and having

their votes recorded as all Democratic.

The combination of these concerns provides compelling circumstantial evidence

for the existence of at least a possibility that the outcomes of the 2002

elections were shaped by partisan electronic manipulation of the vote count.

 

14. Exit Poll Company Replaced in 2004

Until recently, the major American corporate infomedia networks

(ABC,CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, and AP) relied on a consortium known

as the Voter News Service for vote-counting and exit poll information. But

following the scandals and consequent embarrassments of the 2000

and 2002 elections, this consortium was disbanded. It was replaced

in 2004 by a partnership of Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International

known as the National Election Pool.

 

15. Exit Polls Were Fiddled With on November 2

One of the clear indicators of massive electoral fraud was the wide

divergence, both nationally and in swing states, between exit poll

results and the reported vote tallies. The major villains, it would seem,

were the suppliers of touch-screen voting machines. There appears to

be evidence, however, that the corporations responsible for assembling

vote-counting and exit poll information may also have been complicit in

the fraud.

 

The National Election Pool's own data—as transmitted by CNN on the

evening of November 2 and the early morning of November 3—suggest

very strongly that the results of the exit polls were themselves fiddled late

on November 2 in order to make their numbers conform with the tabulated

vote tallies.

 

It is important to remember how large the discrepancy was between

the early vote tallies and the early exit poll figures. By the time

polls were closing in the eastern states, the vote-count figures published

by CNN showed Bush leading Kerry by a massive 11 percent margin.

At 8:50 p.m. EST, Bush was credited with 6,590,476 votes, and Kerry

with 5,239,414. This margin gradually shrank. By 9:00 p.m., Bush

purportedly had 8,284,599 votes, and Kerry 6,703,874; by 9:06 p.m.,

Bush had 9,257,135, and Kerry had 7,652,510, giving the incumbent

a 9 percent lead, with 54 percent of the vote to Kerry's 45 percent.

 

The early exit polls appear to have caused some concern to the good

people at the National Election Pool: a gap of 12 or 14 percent

between tallied results and exit polls can hardly inspire confidence

in the legitimacy of an election.

 

One can surmise that instructions of two sorts were issued. The

election-massagers working for Diebold, ES&S (Election Systems &

Software) and the other suppliers of black-box voting machines may

have been told to go easy on their manipulations of back-door `

Democrat-Delete' software: mere victory was what the Bush

campaign wanted, not an implausible landslide. And the number

crunchers at the National Election Pool may have been asked to

fix up those awkward exit polls.

 

Fix them they did. When the national exit polls were last updated,

at 1:36 a.m. EST on November 3, men's votes (still 46 percent of the

total) had gone 54 percent to Bush, 45 percent to Kerry, and 1 percent

to Nader; women's votes (54 percent of the total) had gone 47 percent

to Bush, 52 percent to Kerry, and 1 percent to Nader.

 

But how do we know the fix was in? Because the exit poll data also

included the total number of respondents. At 9:00 p.m. EST, this

number was well over 13,000; by 1:36 a.m. EST on November 3

it had risen by less than 3 percent, to a final total of 13, 531 respondents—

but with a corresponding swing of 5 percent from Kerry to Bush in

voters' reports of their choices. Given the increase in respondents,

a swing of this size is a mathematical impossibility.

 

The same pattern is evident in the exit polls of two key swing

states, Ohio and Florida.

 

At 7:32 p.m. EST, CNN was reporting the following exit poll data for

Ohio. Women voters (53 percent of the total) favored Kerry over

Bush by 53 percent to 47 percent; male voters (47 percent of the total)

preferred Kerry over Bush by 51 percent to 49 percent. Kerry was

thus leading Bush by a little more than 4 percent. But by 1:41 a.m. EST

on November 3, when the exit poll was last updated, a dramatic shift

had occurred: women voters had split 50-50 in their preferences for

Kerry and Bush, while men had swung to supporting Bush over Kerry

by 52 percent to 47 percent. The final exit polls showed Bush leading

in Ohio by 2.5 percent.

 

At 7:32 p.m., there were 1,963 respondents; at 1:41 a.m. on November

3, there was a final total of 2,020 respondents. These fifty-seven

additional respondents must all have voted very powerfully for Bush—

for while representing only a 2.8 percent increase in the number of

respondents, they managed to produce a swing from Kerry to Bush

of fully 6.5 percent.

 

In Florida, the exit polls appear to have been tampered with in a

similar manner. At 8:40 p.m. EST, CNN was reporting exit polls that

showed Kerry and Bush in a near dead heat. Women voters (54

percent of the total) preferred Kerry over Bush by 52 percent to 48

percent, while men (46 percent of the total) preferred Bush over

Kerry by 52 percent to 47 percent, with 1 percent of their votes

going to Nader. But the final update of the exit poll, made at 1:01 a.m.

EST on November 3, showed a different pattern: women voters now

narrowly preferred Bush over Kerry, by 50 percent to 49 percent,

while the men preferred Bush by 53 percent to 46 percent, with

1 percent of the vote still going to Nader. These figures gave Bush

a 4 percent lead over Kerry.

 

The number of exit poll respondents in Florida had risen only from

2,846 to 2,862. But once again, a powerful numerical magic was at

work. A mere sixteen respondents—0.55 percent of the total number

—produced a four percent swing to Bush.

 

What we are witnessing, the evidence would suggest, is a late-night

contribution by the National Elections Pool to the rewriting of

history.

 

16. Republicans Attempt to Explain Discrepancies in Exit

Polls and Actual Vote

Despite all kinds of promises to fix things so that the 2004

presidential election could go off without major hitches, what

occurred was a malicious mix combining the worst of the

2000 and 2002 scenarios. When the exit polls proved to be

highly errant in key battleground states such as Ohio and

Florida the mainstream media simplistically explained that

Bush voters had demonstrated a greater reluctance to talk to

pollsters than did Kerry supporters.

 

This argument sounds as convincing as the one Republicans made in

2000 that the reason why so many chads were spat out in Florida did not

relate to the age and unreliability of the machines, but because

large numbers of voters decided at the last second to not vote for

president, resulting in half-hearted stabs at the paper before them.

The same media that recited this nonsense repeatedly, as long as

James Baker could say it with a straight face, is now attacking Internet

critics citing corruption in the 2004 vote as "spreadsheet conspiracy

theorists."

 

The latest effort in the feeble mainstream media assault occurred

today when the Miami Herald published an article contending that

Bush really did carry Florida by securing Democratic votes in the

traditionally conservative northern tier of the state. CNN Online

 immediately picked up the story and ran it. The information was

meant to refute the contention that Bush's total was inflated by

the new touch screen voting machines used in the Sunshine

State. The story covered three small counties with four digit

figures as part of a smokescreen dodge to avoid the harsh

reality that something was truly amiss in the 2004 Florida

presidential count.

 

When Robert Parry of the ConsortiumNews.com site recently

noted that Bush had what appeared to be highly inflated vote

totals in the heavily Democratic southern counties of Palm

Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade, the Washington Post

criticized him and fuzzed up the process by using the same

argument posed today in the Miami Herald. Bush had won

because of his strength among conservative Democratic

elements in the state's northern tier.

 

Parry immediately rebutted the article by pointing out that his

survey had deliberately avoided the state's notably conservative

north with its smaller population and concentrated on the traditionally

vote rich Democratic counties concentrated near Miami. In this connection it

has been reported that Bush may have received some 130,000 to 260,000

unaccounted for votes in the state's southern region. Where did these

votes come from?

 

The reason why the media seeks to shift the focus to the state's

northern section is that it is far easier to bootstrap the Bush

victory alongside Karl Rove's frequently repeated goal of adding

some four million votes from the 2000 total from conservative

Christian evangelicals.From the clumsy manner in which the

mainstream media seeks to take Robert Parry and others to

task for pointing out voting discrepancies it is obvious that no

solid foundation exists supporting the alleged Bush- voting surge.

 

On Election Night Ken Mehlman significantly crowed not about

Republican gains in the north but in the south, especially along

the Interstate 4 tier known as the I-4 Corridor. His effusiveness

was sought to spin optimism for a Florida victory, but in focusing

on this area the question once more surfaces: Where did this

sudden surge of Bush votes come from? Meanwhile in Democratic

stronghold Broward County the new Bush-appointed Supervisor

of Elections, Brenda Snipes, announced shortly before the

November 2 election that over 90,000 absentee ballots had not

been sent out. This discovery came after her office had been

flooded with calls from concerned voters who had not received

their absentee ballots.

 

Snipes eventually appealed to Secretary of State Glenda Hood in

Tallahassee to resolve the problem. What happened? We do know,

however, that Hood is wearing Katherine Harris's old mantle well.

She helped Jeb Bush prepare another "felon list" to disqualify

African American voters, just as her predecessor had infamously

done four years ago. There was another sea of "spoiled votes"

tossed into receptacles. Guess where they predominantly came

from? If you said African American precincts you are one hundred

percent correct.

 

Greg Palast uncovered the Florida fraud involving Jeb Bush and

Katherine Harris four years ago. Significantly, his reporting came

from the BBC and not an American outpost, since the mainstream

media turned deaf when he came calling. After investigating the

2004 election he announced that Kerry had won both Ohio and

New Mexico. Palast noted that the "spoiled vote" discard piles

were awesome in both states, with African American precincts

singled out in Ohio and Hispanics from predominantly Democratic

voting stations debited in New Mexico.

 

17. Some Hard Cold Facts

80% of all votes in America are counted by only

two companies: Diebold and ES&S.  

 

There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or

oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry.  

 

The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S

are brothers.  

 

The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign

organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to

helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president

next year."  

 

35% of ES&S is owned by Republican Senator Chuck Hagel,

who became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.

 

Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper

trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that

the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was

legitimately put in by voters.  

 

Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket

machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper

trail.  

 

Diebold is based in Ohio and supplies almost all the voting

machines there.

 

None of the international election observers were allowed in

the polls in Ohio.

 

30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch

screen voting machines.

 

Bush's Help America Vote Act of 2002 has as its goal to

replace all machines with the new electronic touch screen systems.

 

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel owns 35% of ES&S and was caught

lying about it.

 

ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and

counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.  

 

Exit polls for the 2004 elections were accurate within 1% or

less in areas where ballot machines were used.  

 

Major exit poll data discrepancies were noted in counties where

touch screen machines were used, especially in Ohio and Florida .

 

18. Conclusion

The above are the lines that connect the dots of the Bush Conspiracy

to steal this election. As Fox News' "fair and balanced" Bill

O'Reilly says repeatedly "we report, you decide".

 

Well, go ahead and decide. If you decide that George Bush is

guilty, then we all must act now or else there will be no next time.