|New Civilization News: What? The 2004 Election Again?|
Category: Legal, Justice
10 comments26 Feb 2005 @ 14:39 by sprtskr : are we
getting our hopes up again just to have them dashed against a brick wall? Well maybe, but if it will help future elections it will be worth it.
26 Feb 2005 @ 14:59 by vaxen : Nice...
more "smoke and mirrors" for the unwary. In the meanwhile? We've got our pernmanent bases (albeit not so 'permanent') in Iraq and are planning the next stage of the 'takeover.'
Kerry/Edwards? They are ALL traitors in Washingtons' White-House regardless of the hook! The International 'BAR' association operates out of the 'Crown!'
It matters not one iota who is "president" because the 'Constitution' is a ruse and so is this puppet Government of satraps! Waste your valuable time and energy, if you want to, on the lie, or dig in and become clear on what happened to this 'country' a long, long time ago.
A Democracy within a Republic? Ha! Whoever heard of such a thing?
3 Mar 2005 @ 11:06 by jazzolog : AG Petro: You Say Affect, I Say Effect
Yes it's finally happened. Jazzolog has snapped, and here I am at 4 in the morning trying to better Ira Gershwin in the lyrics department. Nevertheless, I know I'm not alone in singing "Let's Call The Whole Thing Off"! I mean the controversy here in Ohio over the reelection of George Bush.
I'm confused, and the dearth of news coverage on the court case(s) has brought me to my knees this morning. Previously I could turn to Dan Tokaji and the Moritz College of Law at OSU for help in sorting out developments in election law, but they are mystifyingly barely covering any of this. Am I daft or am I alone in this whole country in thinking the most vital elements of our democracy (or republic) are being fought out at this very moment---and only a handful of people are watching at all?
On Tuesday afternoon, as some of you know, TruthOut's William Pitt put out a bulletin, with the headline "BREAKING: Blackwell Seeks Depositions of Kerry and Edwards" [link] . What has happened is Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro is representing Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, named as defendant, since Blackwell runs all the elections here. (The grand governor of this place has ridden aloof of all the scuffling since November.) In fact on January 10th, Petro petitioned the federal court (Southern District Ohio Eastern Division, Judge Sargus presiding) to dismiss Blackwell from the litigation. "...The Secretary was never a proper party in that case and should not have been joined." [link] (That's an Adobe.)
This time, last Tuesday, the attorney general petitioned again the case be remanded to the US District Court for the Northern District (in which venue they have a more sympathetic judge?). But in the second part of the petition, as TruthOut found, Petro seeks to get rid of the intervening John Kerry and John Edwards. He says they have no connection to the case and have suffered no alleged injury. He concludes if they have, let them so state in a deposition. [link]
Yesterday afternoon the Green Party responded, as one of the plaintiffs, with a mocking indictment of Blackwell's refusal to give deposition himself. "'Mr. Blackwell's contention that he needs to depose Senators Kerry and Edwards is a laughable and blatantly political move. Mr. Blackwell has refused to be deposed himself about the Ohio election, has refused to appear before Congress [link] and has refused to answer questions from members of the House Judiciary Committee who have been investigating allegations of election fraud. To suggest that Kerry and Edwards should be deposed to address a legal technicality while Mr. Blackwell continues to avoid any public scrutiny of his own misconduct in the Ohio election is the height of hypocrisy,' said Blair Bobier, Media Director for the 2004 Cobb-LaMarche campaign. The report by the House Judiciary Committee's Democratic staff on the Ohio election and recount states that 'there were massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio.'"
While the Greens have a good point, Petro does too I think...especially since the Democrats have chosen, since conceding, only to flutter by occasionally to help the case stay afloat. Their clout is acknowledged, but just what are they trying to do? Kerry reminds me somewhat of the Roman patrician farmers, who liked just to tend their gardens unless all the citizens arrived to carry them back to the throne on their shoulders. Petro's not asking for both, just one or the other. I think it would be magnificent if the Democrats took a stand---or took THE stand. Do they think there might have been fraud in Ohio, or not? Do they think people were prevented from voting? Was the voting suppressed in Ohio? If so, was not Kerry/Edwards an injured party? This case seeks to find that out.
So far, I see only a newspaper in New Zealand carrying the story. [link]
But wait, there's more...and here, unlike Paul Harvey (who uses that phrase in his commentaries), is where I've gotten confused. Last night the Associated Press put out a story that baffles me. Here it is~~~
State Wants Judge To Rule On Its Role In Election
Long Voting Lines Spurred Request
POSTED: 6:12 pm EST March 2, 2005
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- The state has asked a federal judge to determine whether it complied with the law in how it conducted last year's presidential election, saying it needs a precedent for challenges in future elections.
The request grew out of a case originally brought by the Ohio Democratic Party against Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, and two county boards of election on Election Day. The party sought to alleviate long lines at polling places in two counties.
U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley ordered Blackwell's office and the Knox and Franklin county boards of election to provide alternative methods of voting. The polls remained open past their 7:30 p.m. closing time to accommodate anyone who was in line at that time. Some voters waited in line more than seven hours and the last ballots were cast early on Nov. 3.
Democrat John Kerry conceded to President Bush on Nov. 3, after his campaign determined he could not significantly cut into Bush's Ohio lead, which wound up being 118,000 votes.
After Kerry conceded, the Democrats asked Marbley to dismiss the case. However, the Ohio Attorney General's office, representing Blackwell, is trying to keep it alive so Marbley will rule on its request. The state filed a motion to intervene, asking Marbley to rule that the state and county boards did not violate constitutional guarantees of the right to vote, as claimed by the Democrats.
The state has no standing in the case because it is moot, Kathleen Trafford, an attorney representing the Ohio Democratic Party, argued before Marbley during a hearing on Wednesday.
"Our action expired when the court's order expired," Trafford said. "The election is over. The votes have been counted. The president has been inaugurated. ... The state's counterclaim does present a live controversy."
The state countered that Marbley should rule so a judgment will be in place if similar court actions are filed in future elections.
"Unless everybody has a personally assigned voting machine, they are going to wait in line," Richard Coglianese, the state's attorney, told Marbley.
Marbley asked Coglianese how he could be sure problems would arise in future elections. "You could argue that 2004 was an aberration," Marbley said.
Coglianese responded that the national spotlight on Ohio was part of a change in the public's interest in politics.
"People have moved into a new era of how they deal with elections," he said.
Marbley said he would rule in the case within one week.
Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
I don't even know what case they're talking about here...and who's on what side. It probably serves me right for getting too close to all the legal dancing around, but I feel this is the real stuff of the democracy and freedom we're proclaiming to the world every day. Am I wrong, or is it at the ballot box Freedom seeks to settle its disputes...rather than on the battlefield? Is it in the courtroom or the corporate boardroom where our fate is decided? It's at this point I wish the media, and their plethora of legal analysts (ready to go on and on about Michael Jackson, as they did about O.J. Simpson) would help me out!
Oh yes, about "affect" and "effect". In his petition on January 10th to dismiss the complaint against Ohio, Attorney General Jim Petro wrote, "Unfortunately the continued litigation over a case that is moot only has the affect (sic) of destroying the sovereignty of the State of Ohio and its courts." (Second paragraph of the Introduction) Am I wrong or is that a misuse of the word "affect"? Maybe not. God knows, few political administrations in the history of mankind have been more affected than these Republicans by effecting attractive affect, rather than good and true effects for their actions.
5 Mar 2005 @ 10:02 by Very Worried @18.104.22.168 : The Vote
WikiPedia also has a good collection of information tracking the voting irregularities and what is going on about it.
6 Mar 2005 @ 09:58 by Peg C @22.214.171.124 : Jazzolog
Thanks for the compilation!
There is an acute case of collective schizophrenia in the Ohio court system, and they're trying hard to pass the malady along to the rest of us. This has been attempted and commented upon before in the last hundred years or so, as was most notably pointed out by Lewis Carroll. Society satirizing inself. Kafka exposed that satire's dark and menacing understory.
I too am losing sleep, trying to unravel the threads of illusion and delusion, hoping to conclude there IS some underlying sanity abroad which will ultimately reveal itself. Hold on!
If you don't stand up for what you believe, you've got the government you deserve.
26 Mar 2005 @ 09:57 by jazzolog : Blackwell Takes The Stand
In catching up with the news and issues (and you know how tricky that has become in our free, democratic society) since Dana and I took our little trip, I see Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell finally offered testimony before the House Administration Committee regarding all the charges made against him and his handling of the 2004 Presidential Election in this state. You mean you didn't hear anything about it either? My my, guess such matters must not be important.
Attorney and assistant professor of law Dan Tokaji introduced the story this way~~~
Congress Comes to Columbus
Several weeks ago, Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell declined to accept the House Administration Committee's invitation to appear before it in D.C. regarding Ohio's 2004 election experience. Yesterday, the committee -- or at least two members of it -- came to Ohio. The Ohio News Network has this report [link] and the Cleveland Plain-Dealer this one [link] .
Dan's own account and views follow here [link] .
Two days later, on Thursday, the gentlemen of The Free Press (Steve Rosenfeld, Bob Fitrakis, and Harvey Wasserman) got their account of the session posted...and this version has the most reporting and actual detail. Please have a look~~~
1 Apr 2005 @ 07:32 by jazzolog : Election 2004
Reply below original message~~~
----- Original Message -----
From: Loraine McCosker
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2005 12:33 AM
Subject: [appalchianohiosc] Election 2004
Scientific Analysis Suggests Presidential Vote Counts May Have Been Altered Group of University Professors Urges Investigation of 2004 Election
WASHINGTON -- March 31 -- Officially, President Bush won November's election by 2.5%, yet exit polls showed Kerry winning by 3%. According to a report to be released today by a group of university statisticians, the odds of a discrepancy this large between the national exit poll and election results happening by accident are close to 1 in a million.
In other words, by random chance alone, it could not have happened. But it did.
Two alternatives remain. Either something was wrong with the exit polling, or something was wrong with the vote count.
Exit polls have been used to verify the integrity of elections in the Ukraine, in Latin America, in Germany, and elsewhere. Yet in November 2004, the U.S. exit poll discrepancy was much more than normal exit poll error (and similar to that of the invalid Ukraine election.)
In a recent survey of US members of the world's oldest and largest computer society, The Association for Computing Machinery, 95% opposed software driven un-auditable voting machines, of the type that now count at least 30% of U.S. votes. Today's electronic vote-counting machines are not required to include basic safeguards that would prevent and detect machine or human caused errors, be they innocent or deliberate.
The consortium that conducted the presidential exit polls, Edison/Mitofsky, issued a report in January suggesting that the discrepancy between election results and exit polls occurred because Bush voters were more reticent than Kerry voters in response to pollsters.
The authors of this newly released scientific study "Analysis of the 2004 Presidential Election Poll Discrepancies" consider this "reluctant Bush responder" hypothesis to be highly implausible, based on extensive analysis of Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data. They conclude, "The required pattern of exit poll participation by Kerry and Bush voters to satisfy the exit poll data defies empirical experience and common sense under any assumed scenario."
A state-by-state analysis of the discrepancy between exit polls and official election results shows highly improbable skewing of the election results, overwhelmingly biased towards the President.
The report concludes, "We believe that the absence of any statistically-plausible explanation for the discrepancy between Edison/Mitofsky's exit poll data and the official presidential vote tally is an unanswered question of vital national importance that needs thorough investigation."
Ph.D. statisticians in America who have seen this group's preliminary exit poll study have not refuted it. This new study is a much more comprehensive an analysis of the exit poll discrepancies.
The report is available on-line:
An executive summary of the report by is available at:
Contributors and Supporters of the Report include:
Josh Mitteldorf, PhD - Temple University Statistics Department
Steven F. Freeman, PhD - Center for Organizational Dynamics, University of Pennsylvania
Brian Joiner, PhD - Prof. of Statistics (ret) University of Wisconsin
Frank Stenger, PhD - Professor, School of Computing, University of Utah
Richard G. Sheehan, PhD -Professor, Department of Finance, University of Notre Dame
Paul F. Velleman, PhD - Associate Prof., Department of Statistical Sciences, Cornell University
Victoria Lovegren, PhD - Department of Mathematics, Case Western Reserve University
Campbell B. Read, PhD - Prof. Emeritus, Department of Statistical Science, Southern Methodist University
Jonathan Simon, J.D., National Ballot Integrity Project
Ron Baiman, PhD - Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of Illinois at Chicago
About US Count Votes
US Count Votes is a Utah non-profit corporation. It is seeking financial support to complete its "National Election Data Archive" project. The goal of the project is to apply statistical and analytic methods to investigate the integrity of the 2004 elections and to provide nationwide, impartial statistical auditing services to help ensure the accuracy of future elections.
For further information: contact Bruce ODell, Vice President, US Count Votes
or visit www.electionarchive.org
Thanks for this Loraine. Some readers may be interested in those footnotes (in brackets) so here they are~~~
 "Evaluation of Edison/Mitofsky Election System 2004" prepared by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International for the National Election Pool (NEP) Jan. 19, 2005
 In the November 21 runoff, Ukraine's official vote count had Prime Minister Yanukovych the winner by 2.7%. Two exit polls showed him losing by 8% and 2%, respectively. Thus, the discrepancy was between 10.7% and 4.7%. In the US, the discrepancy was between 6.5% and 5.5%. See [link] and [link]
My source for the story, as usual these days, is a site out of New Zealand(!)~~~
23 Jun 2005 @ 09:16 by jazzolog @126.96.36.199 : The DNC On Ohio
Today's papers are carrying the story of the Democratic National Committee's report on the 2004 election as conducted in Ohio. Dan Moritz should have his analysis of it for us soon. [link] In the meantime I like how BradBlog is covering it~~~
Blogged by Brad on 6/22/2005 @ 12:57pm PT...
DNC Releases Long-Awaited 2004 Ohio Election Report!
REPORT: African-Americans Were Far More Likely to be Challenged at Polls, Waited Longer and Were Disenfranchised!
Touch-Screen Machines Far More Problematic Than Others, 'Vulnerable to Fraud', Recommends Such Machines No Longer Be Used...
As presented to DNC Chairman Howard Dean this morning, the DNC Voting Rights Institute has finally released its long-awaited report entitled "Democracy at Risk: The 2004 Election in Ohio" ... [link]
As presented to DNC Chairman Howard Dean this morning, the DNC Voting Rights Institute has finally released its long-awaited report entitled "Democracy at Risk: The 2004 Election in Ohio".
We're currently reviewing the report, which is available for download in full or by sections at the DNC website.
Donna Brazile, the chair of the Voting Rights Institute introduced the report at a press conference this morning as reported by The BRAD BLOG late last night. In her opening statements she said that the report "was five months in the making and represents an exhaustive review of public documents."
The BRAD BLOG has obtained Brazile's complete opening statement, available here. [link] Here are some of the highlights from that statement...
"The right to vote is the bedrock on which our Democracy stands. If citizens cannot believe that their vote counts, and will actually be counted, they understandably lose interest in the basic work of citizenship, like voting and participating in public debate over relevant issues.
"Our study addresses legitimate questions and concerns raised in Ohio, including questions about voting machines How effective were they?
"Why were there enough machines in some counties and not in others? Why were there so many more provisional ballots cast in Ohio than in other states of comparable size?
2.8% of all ballots cast in Ohio were provisional ballots, as contrasted with only 0.9% in PA and 0.3% in FLA.
"Why were people standing in line for hours and why werent they showing up on the rolls after so many new voters registered? Why did young people have so many hassles voting?
"Our report concludes that more than one-quarter of Ohio voters had problems at the polls. Far more troubling, twice as many African American voters reported problems at the polls than did white voters.
"African American voters reported waiting an average of 52 minutes before voting while white voters overall reported waiting 18 minutes.
"African American voters were far more likely to have their registration status challenged and to report experiencing intimidation at the polls than other voters. 16% of African Americans reported experiencing intimidation at the polls as opposed to 5% of whites.
"Counties using touchscreen machines had far more problems than voters in other counties.
"Nearly one-quarter of Ohio voters report that their experience in 2004 has made them less confident about the reliability of elections in Ohio. 71% of whites reported being very confident their vote was counted as opposed to 19% of African Americans.
"Election reform is a bipartisan responsibility and a bipartisan concern. The Democratic Party will continue to work with Members of Congress, state lawmakers, local election officials and community leaders to make sure that all voters maintain confidence in our system of elections.
"Among the recommendations made in our report, is the request for a commitment on the part of the Democratic Party to monitor election reform in all fifty states and the district of Columbia, including the codification into law of all election practices; the adoption of clear standards for the equitable distribution of voting equipment and the assignment of poll workers; the adoption of uniform standards for voter registration and the monitoring of same; the implementation of statewide voter lists; the adoption of uniform standards for the issuance of provisional ballots and enforceable rules for counting provisional ballots; to adopt legislation which limits identification requirements to first time voters at the time they apply for voter registration or the first time they vote, whichever should first occur, and to adopt and enforce procedures to guarantee that identification requirements are not abused as a voter suppression tactic; to encourage the adoption of precinct-tabulated optical scan voting machines; to abstain from using touchscreen voting machines unless or until they are perfected such that they are no longer vulnerable to fraud---and even then, to discontinue the use of touchscreen voting machines that do not have a reliable voter verifiable audit feature; to discontinue the use of punchcard systems; and to require voting equipment vendors to disclose source codes so that they may be examined by third parties and ensure that voting procedures are transparent at every level of the voting process; to push for legislation requiring that all equipment used by voters to tabulate votes must not be used for any other purpose; to encourage states to adopt no excuse required standards for absentee voting; to encourage states to make it easier for college students to vote in the jurisdiction where their school is located; to develop secure and effective voting procedures for registered voters living overseas; to make voter suppression a criminal offense in every jurisdiction; to improve the education of poll workers and to educate voters where, when and how to vote; and to prohibit partisan officials who volunteer to work for a candidate from overseeing or administering that candidates election."
The Republican National Chairman responded the whole report is "fiction." [link] That means all these people interviewed were lying? Ohio's Secretary of State Blackwell had his usual spokesperson Carlo LoParo (does anybody know his background?) tell us the report is a personal attack against him because he's running for governor. [link] What would happen to a Republican who said, "These problems are important to everyone; let's get together and take a look"?
17 Oct 2016 @ 18:13 by yakuza4d2 @188.8.131.52 : togel online hongkong
thank you for providing web were very nice and helpful
29 Nov 2016 @ 16:53 by yakuza4d @184.108.40.206 : togel online
After read a couple of the articles on your website these few days, and I truly like your style of blogging. I tag it to my favorites internet site list and will be checking back soon. Please check out my web site also and let me know what you think.
Other entries in Legal, Justice
24 Nov 2008 @ 10:57: American Justice: Any Hope?
11 Nov 2008 @ 07:40: In justice in Utah
14 May 2008 @ 12:45: Kriss Hammond wants to change my financial status
3 Dec 2007 @ 22:40: Megadukkhas - quantifying suffering
16 Jul 2007 @ 09:28: Constitutional Crisis
6 Jul 2007 @ 23:16: Year One of the Roberts Court
4 Jul 2007 @ 10:50: Justice Texas Style
20 Apr 2007 @ 09:57: If I Hear "Robust" Once More, I'm Gonna Puke
26 Mar 2007 @ 19:25: The Profit
7 Jun 2006 @ 17:29: Transport of London sucks