PDA

View Full Version : American Center for Voting Rights - fraud




diamond geezer
Aug 17, 2005, 06:14 PM
link (http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/search/s_360812.html)

The supposedly nonpartisan American Center for Voting Rights -- which purports to expose voter fraud -- is a fraud.
The organization's 368-page study "Vote Fraud, Intimidation & Suppression in the 2004 Presidential Election," which was released last week, indicated that Democrats were the instigators in every case from Alabama to Wisconsin -- except two.

It also said that the two complaints regarding Republicans had no merit.

The "findings" about Democrat wrongdoing are not surprising considering that the three public faces of the nonpartisan group are very partisan Republican operatives -- including one who claims to be a sounding board for senior White House adviser Karl Rove.

More disturbing than blatant partisanship in the guise of objectivity is that the Republican State Committee of Pennsylvania shamelessly cites the study's findings to claim Philadelphia is No. 1 in election fraud. More disturbing still is that the committee claims it knew virtually nothing about the ACVR and yet stands by its decision to parrot its assertions.

"Quite frankly, I do not know who did the report," said Eileen Melvin, state GOP chair.

And most disturbing is that Mrs. Melvin admits she will use studies from other organizations that she knows virtually nothing about to support the party's positions.

"I did not know it existed prior to the study's release," said Josh Wilson, the state committee's media maven, about the ACVR.

Mr. Wilson also was unconcerned when informed about the staunch, well-connected Republican operatives running it.

"We stand by the report," he said. "To our knowledge they are nonpartisan. The report satisfies us." The Republican state committees in Washington and Wisconsin also used that study in news releases, Wilson said. "There likely were others."

Mark F. (Thor) Hearne II, the ACVR legislative fund counsel, and board member Brian A. Lunde signed off on the study.

Mr. Hearne, counsel to the Bush-Cheney presidential campaign in 2004, said, "Our intention is not to have a partisan document. Let the chips fall where they may."

Mr. Lunde, who had worked for Democrat candidates, presumably is the nonpartisan organization's counterbalance to Hearne.

"These are not Republican facts or Democrat facts," Lunde said of the study. "These are just the facts as they happen. That's why we call them as we see them. We wanted to take the partisanship out."

Lunde was the national executive director of Democrats for Bush.

That might be why Mr. Rove asks Lunde to suggest potential appointees for the Bush administration, according to Lunde. He also claims he is Rove's sounding board. "It's a very informal thing," Lunde said.

Jim Dyke, the ACVR spokesman, had been communications director for the Republican National Committee, Lunde said.

When asked to name any contributors to his nonprofit, Hearne claimed he did not know but said Lunde did. When Lunde was asked, he claimed he did not know but said Hearne did.

"I do not know who is funding the group," Wilson said. "No review was done on that."

The executive summary of the study says, "This important task requires an honest accounting of activity during the 2004 election, so that we may move forward with a common set of facts to address the issues that undermine public confidence in American elections."



diamond geezer
Aug 17, 2005, 06:25 PM
link (http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0813-29.htm)
Election Fraud Continues in the US
New Data Shows Widespread Vote Manipulations in 2004
By Peter Phillips

In the fall of 2001, after an eight-month review of 175,000 Florida ballots never counted in the 2000 election, an analysis by the National Opinion Research Center confirmed that Al Gore actually won Florida and should have been President. However, coverage of this report was only a small blip in the corporate media as a much bigger story dominated the news after September 11, 2001.

New research compiled by Dr. Dennis Loo with the University of Cal Poly Pomona now shows that extensive manipulation of non-paper-trail voting machines occurred in several states during the 2004 election.

The facts are as follows:

In 2004 Bush far exceeded the 85% of registered Florida Republican votes that he got in 2000, receiving more than 100% of the registered Republican votes in 47 out of 67 Florida counties, 200% of registered Republicans in 15 counties, and over 300% of registered Republicans in 4 counties. Bush managed these remarkable outcomes despite the fact that his share of the crossover votes by registered Democrats in Florida did not increase over 2000, and he lost ground among registered Independents, dropping 15 points. We also know that Bush "won" Ohio by 51-48%, but statewide results were not matched by the court-supervised hand count of the 147,400 absentee and provisional ballots in which Kerry received 54.46% of the vote. In Cuyahoga County, Ohio the number of recorded votes was more than 93,000 greater than the number of registered voters.

More importantly national exit polls showed Kerry winning in 2004. However, It was only in precincts where there were no paper trails on the voting machines that the exit polls ended up being different from the final count. According to Dr. Steve Freeman, a statistician at the University of Pennsylvania, the odds are 250 million to one that the exit polls were wrong by chance. In fact, where the exit polls disagreed with the computerized outcomes the results always favored Bush - another statistical impossibility. .

Dennis Loo writes, "A team at the University of California at Berkeley, headed by sociology professor Michael Hout, found a highly suspicious pattern in which Bush received 260,000 more votes in those Florida precincts that used electronic voting machines than past voting patterns would indicate compared to those precincts that used optical scan read votes where past voting patterns held."

There is now strong statistical evidence of widespread voting machine manipulation occurring in US elections since 2000. Coverage of the fraud has been reported in independent media and various websites. The information is not secret. But it certainly seems to be a taboo subject for the US corporate media.

Black Box Voting reported on March 9, 2005 that voting machines used by over 30 million voters were easily hacked by relatively unsophisticated programs and audits of the computers would not show the changes. It is very possible that a small team of hackers could have manipulated the 2004 and earlier elections in various locations throughout the United States. Irregularities in the vote counts certainly indicate that something beyond chance occurrences has been happening in recent elections.

That a special interest group might try to cheat on an election in the United States is nothing new. Historians tell us how local political machines from both major parties have in the past used methods of double counting, ballot box stuffing, poll taxes and registration manipulation to affect elections. In the computer age, however, election fraud can occur externally without local precinct administrators having any awareness of the manipulations - and the fraud can be extensive enough to change the outcome of an entire national election.

There is little doubt key Democrats know that votes in 2004 and earlier elections were stolen. The fact that few in Congress are complaining about fraud is an indication of the totality to which both parties accept the status quo of a money based elections system. Neither party wants to further undermine public confidence in the American "democratic" process (over 80 millions eligible voters refused to vote in 2004). Instead we will likely see the quiet passing of legislation that will correct the most blatant problems. Future elections in the US will continue as an equal opportunity for both parties to maintain a national democratic charade in which money counts more than truth.

skunk
Aug 17, 2005, 07:32 PM
Sounds like it's time for another revolution. Why the hell is everybody so compliant?

solvs
Aug 18, 2005, 01:04 AM
Sounds like it's time for another revolution. Why the hell is everybody so compliant?
This is America. We don't want to think about it. It makes us angry and all, but we're busy people. We don't have time to care about stuff just because it affects every aspect of our miserable lives.

That, and we're not all that bright.