Monday 1/17/05 update thread for fraud/election/recount/protests

Let us march on ballot boxes, march on ballot boxes until race-baiters disappear from the political arena. Let us march on ballot boxes until the salient misdeeds of bloodthirsty mobs will be transformed into the calculated good deeds of orderly citizens.

Let us march on ballot boxes until the Wallaces of our nation tremble away in silence. Let us march on ballot boxes until we send to our city councils, state legislatures, and the United States Congress, men who will not fear to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God.

Let us march on ballot boxes until brotherhood becomes more than a meaningless word in an opening prayer, but the order of the day on every legislative agenda. Let us march on ballot boxes until all over Alabama God's children will be able to walk the earth in decency and honor.

—Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., Montgomery, Alabama, March 25, 1965

For all those who would like to be protesting in Washington on Inauguration Day but will not be able to attend, this is a call to organize "Investigate Ohio" rallies at noon on Thursday, Jan. 20 at the office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation nearest you.

We see the purpose of the rallies not only to protest what appears to be the second illegitimate inauguration of George W. Bush, but more importantly to push the FBI to fully investigate the evidence of widespread vote rigging in Ohio, and by inference in other states, as documented in the historic "Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio" (pdf), published by the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic staff, under the leadership of Congressman John Conyers Jr.

The report, which has received no significant press attention, found: "...massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior..."

The report also said: "...Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousands of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors, selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards."

Laws apparently violated include: The Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Equal Protection, Due Process and Ohio right to vote laws. This, of course, means that there is likely no legitimacy to the 2004 Bush "election".

In spite of the exceptional documentation in the Conyers report, which formed the basis for objections to Congressional approval of the Ohio presidential vote on Jan. 6, by Barbara Boxer in the Senate and 31 House members, the FBI has failed to investigate the apparent widespread violations of Federal law.

Indeed, as of earlier this week, the FBI failed to answer a December 15 request by Congressman Conyers for investigation of possible tampering with Ohio voting machines by the firm Triad. The FBI has made no response to a request of investigation of the Presidential vote in Ohio, Florida and other states, made on December 3 by citizens of Westchester County, New York. Congressman Conyers continues to seek FBI action and to call for a full investigation of Ohio by Congress.

We see the rallies as a way of not only specifically supporting Congressman Conyers, but to thank Senator Boxer and the House members who had the courage to object to "Ohio" and by implication, the election and inauguration of George W. Bush. The rallies, further, would thank the hundreds of citizens who have worked tirelessly in Ohio, Florida and a number of other states to document and publicize widespread voter disenfranchisement.

Congressman Conyers' appears to be the only initiative now available that could result in convictions for Ohio voter disenfranchisment. It can be argued that there is no way to prevent further schemes for disenfranchisement without convictions for what happened in Ohio.

We recommend that you read the Conyers report, which can be found at http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/, because it documents specific steps that were taken in Ohio to dismantle the franchise, particularly for black voters and also, to a lesser degree, for low-income and young voters.

In Ohio, and other key states, the challenge for Republican officials, party workers and consultants was to counteract the highly effective voter registration drives aimed at likely supporters of Democratic candidates.

The Conyers report shows that Ohio Republicans moved to meet this challenge in a number of well-conceived, systematic, illegal steps that exploited weaknesses in the state voting system, including: failure to put adequate numbers of voting machines in precincts where a high Democratic turnout was expected, particularly black precincts; manipulation of provisional ballots; voter intimidation; misinformation to voters; and manipulation of voting machines.

A particularly interesting incident, that one would think would spark FBI interest, is cited in the Conyers report:

"In Franklin County, a worker at the Holiday Inn observed a team of 25 people who called themselves the 'Texas Strike Force' using payphones to make intimidating calls to likely voters, targeting people recently in the prison system. The 'Texas Strike Force' members paid their way to Ohio, but their hotel accomodations were paid for by the Ohio Republican Party, whose headquarters is across the street. The hotel worker heard one caller threaten a likely voter with being reported to the FBI and returning to jail if he voted. Another hotel worker called the police, who came but did nothing."

It is essential that we demand justice in Ohio, and other states.

For additional information, please contact: Nick Mottern (914)806-6179, Investigate N-02.

A Republican lawmaker who advocates a voter ID requirement is criticizing the Milwaukee Election Commission's handling of voters who registered at the polls Nov. 2, saying some 10,000 could not be sent cards to verify their address.

State Rep. Jeff Stone (R-Greendale) said Friday the number reflects cases where registration cards filled out by voters were illegible or, in some cases, duplicates.

City officials, though, said late Friday there may be other explanations, such as voters who registered at the polls even though they had registered in advance, or filled out cards to update flawed ones they had submitted earlier.

Republicans are often charged with trying to suppress the vote. Well, we won in November and it's impossible to charge us with that after the election's over.

2004 COBB/BADNARIK RECOUNT
CLERMONT COUNTY, OHIO
DECEMBER 16, 2005

Presentation at 2:00 PM Board of Elections Meeting

We the undersigned witnesses for the Ohio 2004 Cobb/Badnarik Recount in Clermont County hereby present this challenge and action request to the Board of Electors of Clermont County (“Board”):

1. We ask each member of the Board to disclose publicly what knowledge he or she has of the “stickers” found on certain ballots selected for the 3% hand count in Clermont County. Who affixed such stickers, what was their purpose and what statutory or regulatory authority can be cited in support of such practice?

2. We ask the Board to explain the decision of the Director not to reprint the ballots in order to remove the name of Ralph Nader as a candidate. If the decision was made not to reprint the ballots because there was insufficient time before Election Day, why is it that other counties were able to reprint their ballots to remove Nader’s name in time for the election? What actions were taken to attempt to reprint the ballots in time? What considerations went into such decision with respect to how the presence of this candidate might tend to siphon off legitimate votes for other candidates?

3. We ask the Board to explain each decision made at the Tuesday, December 14 meeting of the Board to count potential “overvotes” and potentially altered ballots, specifically:
a. Ballots to which stickers had been affixed to cover up marks in front of the name of one candidate where ovals were blackened for another candidate – such votes being treated in accordance with your Tuesday vote as votes for the candidate whose oval remained blackened, and not as overvotes
b. Ballots where there were two votes for a single candidate, one vote evidenced on the write-in line and a second vote being evidenced by a blackening of the oval next to the same candidate’s name, these ballots being treated as overvotes or, potentially, inconsistently depending upon the identity of the candidate benefiting from the characterization
c. Votes for both Ralph Nader and another candidate, which votes were not treated as overvotes, but rather a vote for the second candidate whose oval was blackened

4. If the Board has voted or does vote in the future not to change the characterization of the ballots in question as described in (3) above, which decision will result in there being no discrepancy between the 3% hand count and 3% tabulator count, we challenge such action on the grounds that it operates to lead to a false conclusion that no irregularities exist that justify a 100% recount in accordance with the Secretary of State’s guidelines. We hereby exercise our right to demand a 100% hand recount of the votes of Clermont County.

5. In the absence of a 100% recount and a completion of the review of documents pursuant to the recount (viz., the poll books, the uncounted abstentee ballots and the uncounted provisional ballots, as described below), we challenge any premature certification of the Clermont County 2004 election.

6. In the event there is no 100% hand recount, we restate our request that there be a substitution of some larger precincts so that the sampling will be more representative of the constituency of the county and we request that the Board override the decision of Danny Bare, director of the Board of Elections, not to accommodate this request.

7. In the event no substitution of precincts is made as requested in (6) above, we challenge the randomness of the selected precincts under the guidelines issued by the Secretary of State, which require a “random” selection. The precincts selected for recount were not selected randomly; rather, the smallest precincts were selected, plus one additional precinct, which could “skew” the results.

8. We hereby restate our request for the following documents and challenge any certification of the 2004 vote on the grounds that the recount has not been completed, because there has been no 100% hand recount and the following have not been provided for reasonable review by Cobb/Badnarik witnesses:
a. Polling books for all precincts
b. Uncounted (rejected) absentee ballots
c. Uncounted (rejected) provisional ballots (which should include the name and address of each provisional voter), together with an explanation in each case as to the reason for the rejection

9. Additionally, we ask as citizens for
a. A list of the names, addresses, telephone numbers and titles or job duties of all employees, contractors, officials, Board members and others playing a role in the process of counting, recounting, systems certification and other matters affecting the integrity of the 2004 election in Clermont County and a list of any conflicts of interest that any such individuals or companies may have with respect to the role played by each such individual or company.
b. Online minutes and other public information as to the proceedings of the Tuesday, December 14 Board meeting and the meeting held today. Signed this 16 day of December, 2004:

_____________________________________________|
Tina Herald, Clermont County Recount Coordinator

_____________________________________________
Cynthia Asrir, Recount Regional Coordinator, SW Ohio

_____________________________________________
Bob M. Drake, Clermont County Recount Witness