2008 Presidential Voter Fraud:DIEBOLD/CNN/GE A Fuller Spectrum of Deception!

[Dig]

Post all the evidence, testimonies, videos of the Neo-con game plan to rig New Hampshire.

[menace]

They are reporting that Obama and McCain did good in the early votes.

Sen. Barack Obama won seven of the 10 votes cast for Democrats in the first balloting of the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday in the northern hamlet of Dixville Notch, while Sen. John McCain won the Republican balloting.

Ballots by all 17 registered voters were cast and counted just after midnight on Tuesday in the remote White Mountains town that takes advantage of a state law allowing communities to close polls once voting is over and announce the results.

Other than those for Obama, of Illinois, former North Carolina senator John Edwards got two votes and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richards received one. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton received none.

Among the seven votes cast for Republicans, Arizona Sen. John McCain won four, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney received 2, and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani won one vote.

The ballots in Dixville Notch and nearby Harts Location represent the first direct voting in New Hampshire's primary, the next battleground in the state-by-state process of choosing Republican and Democratic candidates for November's election to replace President George W. Bush.

Though its population is tiny at 74 residents, Dixville Notch is home to the 15,000-acre (6,070-hectare) Balsams Grand Resort Hotel near the Canadian border.

In 1960, to spark publicity and serve a civic function, the resort's late owner, Neil Tillotson, opened voting booths at midnight on primary day and reported the results of the staff's ballots to the local wire service.

He did the same on election day in November. Every four years since, the media spotlight shines on Dixville Notch, luring a stream of politicians including President George W. Bush, and former presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan.

As in past years, it was as much a media sideshow as an exercise in U.S. democracy, with television cameras crowding the "ballot room" of the hotel.

Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter of California was the only candidate to attend the balloting in Dixville Notch.

Three Republicans -- McCain, Giuliani and Texas Rep. Ron Paul -- made the trek to campaign last year.

To speed things up, in an attempt to assure Dixville Notch would be first to finish voting, each of the 13 voters present had a voting booth. Four others voted by absentee ballot. The balloting was over within minutes as 12 Independents, 3 Republicans and 2 Democrats voted.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080108/pl_nm/usa_politics_dixville_dc

[industria]

WTF is this?   

A replay of the UK news cast announcing building 7 had fallen before it happened?
(or do I need to get some sleep? haha)

From FOX of course:
http://media.myfoxdc.com/YouDecide/race8.htm




(reposted by me from the Live Free or Die thread)

[Sonja]

Wait a minute, I must be missing something. Its not f**king Tuesday, its 9am in NH right now. WTF? Screen shots please.

They are reporting that Obama and McCain did good in the early votes

Are you telling me people are voting at midnight?

[industria]

Wait a minute, I must be missing something. Its not f**king Tuesday, its 9am in NH right now. WTF? Screen shots please.

I know it nuts!

I took this screen shot in several formats, and sizes, if anyone wants something different.

[Azariah]

did you bust em already

[industria]

Wait a minute, I must be missing something. Its not f**king Tuesday, its 9am in NH right now. WTF? Screen shots please. Are you telling me people are voting at midnight?

They did only in Dixville Notch and Hart's Location

Dixville Notch
McCain 4
Romney 2
Julie  1
Ron Paul
Huckster

Obama 7
Clinton
Edwards 2
Richardson 1

Hart's Location (the other small NH town with midnight voting)
Obama 9
Clinton 3
Edwards 1

McCain 6
Huckster 5
Ron Paul 4
Romney 1

[Sonja]

No no no, wait, google NH primary, all the news is already in!!!!

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0433304720080108

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama expanded his lead over Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire to 13 points as voting began in the state's critical presidential primary, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Tuesday.

Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona also widened his advantage over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, taking a 36 percent to 27 percent edge after months of hard campaigning in the state.

Obama continued to feed on the momentum from his performance in Iowa last week, when he and Republican Mike Huckabee scored breakthrough wins that left Clinton and Romney reeling.

Obama, a senator from Illinois bidding to make history as the first black U.S. president, led the one-time Democratic front-runner 42 percent to 29 percent. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards was third with 17 percent.

"Obama is still on a roll and not slowing down. He had another big day," pollster John Zogby said.

Obama led Clinton in all categories of voters except women and voters over the age of 65, and was pulling away from the New York senator among base Democratic voters.

"This is the same thing he did in the closing hours in Iowa," Zogby said of Obama.

The rolling poll of 862 likely Democratic voters and 859 likely Republican voters was taken Saturday through Monday. It has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points.  Continued...k at this Google NH primary, all the news is already in:

[Sonja]

ok two counties do midnight voting, f**king weird. Seems a bit exclusionary but oh well. Polls close at 7pm EST

[industria]

ok two counties do midnight voting, f**king weird. Seems a bit exclusionary but oh well. Polls close at 7pm EST

Not really. The law in NH is that any town smaller than 100 people can open thei polls at midnight,  and close as soon as all registered voters have voted.

Only the two towns I listed do it.

[industria]

The report you posted from Reuters ends with an odd remark, to be sure, but the rest is just reporting the poll results, not the actual vote.

"The rolling poll of 862 likely Democratic voters and 859 likely Republican voters was taken Saturday through Monday. It has a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points."

[industria]

Sonja, maybe they're just taunting us. 

[Wintermute]

I think they post results as early as possible to take advantage of the "herd mentality" where the sheeple just want to follow whoever looks like a winner.  They hope it turns undecided sheep into lemmings - all jumping off the same cliff by following the hand-picked candidates.

[Dig]

Uh we ran out of ballots....


?

?

?


http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Dem_turnout_stretches_ballot_supply_in_0108.html

[Dig]

OK, where are the Ron Paul signs at the polling booths that are on TV?

Any reports of Ron Paul signs not being allowed?

Look at the situation people are in when voting, they enter a tunnel of deception before they get to vote.

Any more info on this?

[das_ding]

This is no fraud: NWS at 19.50 $ now.

[gEEk squad]

http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/How_To_Rig_An_Election_In_The_United_States

[ED]

Keep an eye on http://www.politico.com/nhprimaries/nhmap-popup.html for updated results throughout the evening

[Dig]

Here are the over 100 pices of evidence of the Iowa fraud:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=20610.0

[whitelocust]

http://media.myfoxdc.com/YouDecide/race8.htm

same link as the above screen shot. same page. all the info is different.

2 precincts reporting. the numbers are quite different. can someone explain this to me?

[Dig]

Keep an eye on http://www.politico.com/nhprimaries/nhmap-popup.html for updated results throughout the evening

Ron Paul is tied for #1

[Dig]

For more on election fraud, check these recommendations out:

Please read Greg Palast "Armed Madhouse"

Visit Brad Blaog

Visit Black Box Voting

Read the NY Times on Sunday

Read "How to rig an election"

There is already 15-25% fraud

We need to compensate for the fraud, which I believe we are doing.

To say that the NH primaries are NOT fraud is a very wild conspiracy theory that needs evidence to support.  If you have any evidence of this, by all means please share it.

[whitelocust]

definitely would be fishy if the final results matched.

[mrn838]

definitely would be fishy if the final results matched.

More than that...unless Ms. Kleo is on the Fox News payroll.

[lazarus]

The very link you just quoted says he has 5%. McCain has 15% I'd hardly say that's "tying for #1".

look carefully. how can a state with many independents break out and vote for dennis and not do the same for rp?

[den carts]

I'm looking at http://www.politico.com/nhprimaries/nhmap-popup.html
And it says 89% of the precincts reporting? how is this possible?

[Dig]

screen shot that ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dig]

Dennis Kucinich in 2nd place!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

screen shot this it is historical

[gEEk squad]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7719

New Hampshire. Democratic Candidates: These are TEST returns. They must not be broadcast or published


Global Research, January 2, 2008
Associated Press

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

Editor's Note

Originally held in March, New Hampshire will be holding its "first-in-the-nation" primaries next week on January 8. The following is the result of TEST returns, released by the Associated Press.

They were not intended to be made public.

The most popular candidates, according to to the TEST returns are Edwards and Kucinich.
Global Research, 2  January 2008

These are TEST returns. They must not be broadcast or published.

The Associated Press
Wednesday, January 2, 2008

127 of 301 precincts - 42 percent

John Edwards12,390 - 30 percent
Dennis Kucinich9,958 - 24 percent
Mike Gravel2,679 - 7 percent
Bill Richardson2,401 - 6 percent
Barack Obama2,228 - 5 percent
Joe Biden2,178 - 5 percent
Hillary Clinton2,141 - 5 percent
Chris Dodd1,492 - 4 percent
Michael Skok788 - 2 percent
Total Write-ins750 - 2 percent
O. Savior561 - 1 percent
Tom Laughlin537 - 1 percent
Tom Koos498 - 1 percent
Dal LaMagna466 - 1 percent
Caroline Killeen401 - 1 percent
Bill Keefe340 - 1 percent
D.R. Hunter283 - 1 percent
William Hughes249 - 1 percent
Richard Caligiuri212 - 1 percent
Kenneth Capalbo174 - 0 percent
Randy Crow140 - 0 percent
Henry Hewes91 - 0 percent

[SOURCE: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/02/america/NH-Dem-Pres-Sum.php]
--------------------
These are test results, not the real thing.

[Dig]

Hey look at Oregon:

In this article Greg Palast is warning of potential election fraud in Oregon 2008:

The News from Overseas
by Geoff Kelly
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/07/342378.shtml
In November 2000, the BBC sent journalist Greg Palast to Florida to cover that state's haywire election. Palast documented the purging from the voter rolls of more than 90,000 eligible voters, mostly African Americans and minorities—people predisposed to vote for Democrats—based on lists of ex-felons that were at least 97 percent wrong. He discovered that shoddy voting machines guaranteed to render ballots unreadable were sent to voting districts that trended Democratic, while Republican districts received new, more reliable and accurate machines. He uncovered a whole arsenal of vote-gaming techniques employed by the Republican administration of the State of Florida, led by Governor Jeb Bush and Florida Secretary of State Katharine Harrison (who now serves in the US House of Representatives). The deceit and neglect were intentional and widespread, as Palast reported for the BBC and London's Guardian newspapers. No US media outlets would run his stories, however, so he wrote a book, The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (originally published in 2002, reissued by Plume in 2004), which quickly climbed the New York Times best-seller list.

In that book, Palast—who was a renowned economist before turning investigative journalist—reported that the 2004 elections were going to be just as crooked as the 2000 elections. Worse, in fact, because the techniques used in Florida would be deployed in other battleground states. Turns out he was right (as Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s article in last week's Rolling Stone attests) and so Palast has a new book, Armed Madhouse (Dutton, 2006), in which he details how Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell threw his state's election to George W. Bush. The African-American vote, predominantly Democratic, was shamelessly suppressed, according to Palast, in ways that range from unethical to illegal.

Palast also writes about the war on terror, manipulation of the oil and energy markets, US meddling in Latin American affairs, surveillance of US citizens and the nature of global trade, among other subjects, all of which, he says, are intertwined. And he says that the fix is in already for 2008, unless something can be done about it now.

Artvoice: Can you describe the vote theft you uncovered in the 2004 election?

Greg Palast: People were so fascinated with the idea that computers might change our votes—that Karl Rove and Lex Luthor, hidden in a cave underneath Washington, would hit a button and change our votes. But that is not what happened.

What did happen was old-fashioned vote-rustling, just computerized a bit, in which we had votes that never got counted. We had stolen votes, and when I say that I mean uncounted votes or a non-vote. We had 3.6 million votes cast and not counted. And that is a big, big hunk of the vote. Hanging chads and crap punch-card machines, paper ballots that get mangled or mismarked, computers where the vote just simply doesn't register—those things account for close to three million lost votes alone.

However, not everyone's vote spoils the same. If you're in a majority African-American precinct, your vote was 900 percent more likely to spoil than if you were a white voter.

AV: Are states like Florida and Ohio sincerely trying to fix their voting problems?

GP: Just like they did after I wrote my book [The Best Democracy Money Can Buy] about the purging of the black vote in 2000? The NAACP sued then, but it was after the election, and Katharine Harris and Jeb Bush said, "Oh, gee, we're so sorry that all these black folks lost their votes." Then they did it again in 2002. In Ohio, the ACLU sued for crap machines in predominantly black areas and Ken Blackwell, the Republican secretary of state, said, "Well, yeah, I know that black minority voters will lose votes because of crap machines, but phht, too bad."

AV: What do you think of proposals by Republican legislators for voter identification cards?

GP: The Republicans are fanatic about voter IDs. You say, "Well, what's wrong with showing your ID?" Well, the answer is, what crime are we preventing? I've looked all over the country and found only one case out of 100 million voters where a person knowingly cast his vote in someone else's name. I'm just looking for, say, about 10 out of 100 million or 100 out of 100 million—wouldn't that be fair if we are going to change our entire voting system? Shouldn't there be at least one in one million cases of this? But we know 300,000 were denied the right to vote in 2004 because they did not have the right ID.

It is as selective as literacy was during the Jim Crow era. Only certain people get selected [and asked for] ID—in our next election it's going to be Hispanic voters. Florida and Ohio are continuing problems. In 2008 look for vote theft in Arizona, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Oregon and certainly New Mexico too.

AV: What do you make of the Bush administration eavesdropping on US citizens inside the country?

GP: I think that you cannot disconnect the spying on Americans from the fix of the elections. And the signal of this is that the same private companies are involved. ChoicePoint [which, in 2000, provided error-ridden lists of ex-felons, mostly African-American, for the State of Florida, so they could be knocked off the voter rolls] is also the company creating databases for the war on terror.

They're not going after the bad guys; the bad guys came from Saudi Arabia, and we haven't touched them. It is as if you were going after the Cosa Nostra and then invaded the Girl Scouts headquarters. We are allowing the bad guys off the hook because [going after them] would cause discomfort to Saudi Arabia. Instead we are going against Americans, and we are building databases that allow the government to challenge your vote and gather information.

Artvoice: It's interesting that ChoicePoint is now building databases for the Department of Homeland Security.

GP: I got a hold of a secret contract [between ChoicePoint and the Department of Homeland Security] that said "foreign intelligence gathering," and I thought "Oh, wow, they're finally going after Saudi Arabia." But where were they gathering information? Venezuela, Argentina and Mexico. The only thing terrorizing about those nations is that they have presidential candidates who are not very fond of George W. Bush.

That gives you an idea about where our war on terror is going. It is a war on democracy, and it is becoming a Bush regime protection operation, all done under the cover of national security.

No one seems to be asking why they're collecting this stuff. There is this fake battle being set up between civil liberties and protection against terrorists. They're not protecting us. We are giving up our freedoms but receiving nothing in return.

Why are they building these lists? There are probably many reasons, but one thing I know for sure is how the lists are used: They are used for manipulating elections abroad.

AV: Apart from alternative media like Democracy Now! and maybe Harper's, your outlets in the US are limited. Do you ever feel like your work is wasted?

GP: I'm providing ammunition and information—a huge amount of hard information. My stuff originates a large amount of writing and action. That is, you'll see my stuff reappear... you'll see it everywhere from Michael Moore's films to Paul Krugman's columns to legislation. Everything I do is carefully reviewed by the Congressional black caucus, and around the world activist groups act on this stuff. It begins changing the terms of discussion.

Will I get a lot of right-wing people reading my book? Is it the type of book that will attract the mainstream media? Nothing attracts the mainstream media that isn't properly proofed.

For example, before becoming an investigative reporter, I was considered one of the world's leading experts on energy regulation. I wrote a very serious academic book about regulation and Enron, and yet—despite my information and knowledge and being one of the first reporters to break the Enron story—I couldn't get any mainstream television, radio or print to allow me to say one word during the Enron trial. Even my big paid publisher, Penguin, was stunned, given my unquestioned expertise. They had never seen anything like it. They couldn't understand why I couldn't be on Meet the Press or be interviewed by the Times—and the answer is I'm persona non grata.

AV: You are, however, part of the mainstream media for the rest of the world.

GP: I have a very big international stage. I have BBC television, the Guardian papers. I am the mainstream in the rest of the world. And in the United States, what is happening is that the alternative press and the Internet continue to grow in power. As these horrible daily Pravdas in the cities begin to die, it's more likely the word will get out one way or another.

AV: Meanwhile, though, the situation seems hopeless, doesn't it?

But does that mean we throw up our hands and give up? No. As Jessie Jackson, who is co-sponsoring our Armed Madhouse tour, said, "We march, we win." If the first 12 lawsuits fail, file 25 more. If they throw away registrations of new black voters, which they literally do, then you better register more. They are stealing about three to four percent of the vote—that's our calculation. You cannot win with 51 percent anymore.

If you have a rat hole in your house and you cover it up, but then there is another one, you don't give up. You hunt down and kill every rat that you find.

[Dig]

This looks like a fun event to go to:

Around the Nation: January 15, 2008
Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy
Santa Barbara, CA. 4:00pm
http://www.thenation.com/events/permalink/2683
"Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy, 2000-2008", a talk by Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of media, culture and communication at New York University. Prof. Miller is well-known for his analyses of politics and propaganda, and his activism for democratic media reform. His most recent book is Fooled Again: the Real Case for Election Reform.

[Dig]

Fraud Alert
http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/01/14/080114ta_talk_toobin
by Jeffrey Toobin January 14, 2008

Explicit racism has disappeared from mainstream political discourse in the United States. Jesse Helms made his long career in Washington by muttering about “bloc votes,” but he’s been gone from the Senate since 2003, and he has no similarly outspoken successors. Lest anyone think that racial discrimination itself has been banished from politics, however, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, a case that will be heard this week by the Supreme Court, provides a disturbing reminder.

One of the lesser outrages of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bush v. Gore was the banal assertion that “after the current counting, it is likely legislative bodies nationwide will examine ways to improve the mechanisms and machinery for voting.” In fact, the chief “improvement” that has come from the legislatures since 2000 is voter-I.D. laws, like the one that gives rise to this week’s case. In 2005, Indiana began requiring voters to present government-issued photo identification before casting a ballot. (Georgia passed a nearly identical law at about the same time, and several other states have tightened voter-I.D. requirements.) These laws, their sponsors assured the electorate (and now the courts), were passed to correct the problem of voter fraud. As the state of Indiana says in its brief to the Justices, the new rule “establishes reasonable, long-overdue election-security reform in a State highly vulnerable to in-person election fraud.”

Actually, it is this purported justification that is the real fraud. The latest and most extensive examination of electoral irregularities, released in November by the nonpartisan research institute Demos, determined that voter fraud was “very rare,” and every other respectable study has reached the same conclusion. This is certainly true in Indiana, where legislators said they were aiming to stop “voter impersonation,” which was already a crime in the state; in the entire history of Indiana, the number of prosecutions for this offense has been zero. Nationwide, despite an attempt by the Bush Justice Department to crack down on voter fraud, there were only a hundred and twenty federal prosecutions and eighty-six convictions between 2002 and 2006—a period in which close to four hundred million votes were cast.

“Let’s not beat around the bush,” Terence T. Evans, the dissenting Court of Appeals judge in the Indiana case, slyly wrote. “The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly-veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by certain folks believed to skew Democratic.” He’s not the only one to notice: the three federal judges who approved the Indiana law were appointed by a Republican President; the lone dissenter was appointed by a Democrat. It was also Republican-dominated legislatures that produced the Indiana and Georgia laws, both of which were signed by Republican governors.

Who are the “certain folks,” in Judge Evans’s delicate phrase, that the Indiana law is trying to discourage? The best answer can be found in a friend-of-the-court brief in the case filed by twenty-nine leading historians and scholars of voting rights. They concluded that the Indiana law belongs to a malign tradition in “this nation’s history of disfranchising people of color and poor whites under the banner of ‘reform.’ ” Such measures as the poll tax and literacy tests, they write, were “billed as anti-fraud or anti-corruption devices; yet through detailed provisions within them, they produced a discriminatory effect (often intended) within the particular historical context.” So it will be in Indiana, where the law creates a series of onerous barriers to voting. Consider one: you can get a government photo I.D. by showing your birth certificate, but you can’t get a copy of your birth certificate unless you can produce certain official photo I.D.s. And, with up to twenty million Americans of voting age lacking government-issued identification, the matter of requiring photo I.D.s has broad implications.

The Supreme Court case comes at a time when the nation does face a major problem with its elections, but it is the opposite of the one the Indiana law prescribes: it’s not that too many people are voting but too few. Voter turnout rose in the 2004 Presidential election, but it still barely reached sixty per cent. There are any number of ways to begin to address this predicament: holding elections on weekends; allowing same-day registration and voting by mail, telephone, or the Internet; permitting registered voters to cast their ballots over several days or weeks; and putting polling places in shopping malls, to name just a few.

As the Demos report observes, “Overall, the disfranchisement of voters through antiquated voting systems, errors, mismanagement of registration bases, and intimidation or harassment is a far bigger problem today than traditional forms of election fraud.” (These issues, it need hardly be added, were the real problem in Florida in 2000.) Unfortunately, the only serious attempt to address the legacy of 2000, the federal Help America Vote Act, which passed in 2002, today ranks somewhere between a disappointment and a fiasco. In essence, that law issued an unfunded mandate to the states to improve their voting procedures by 2006. Some states, like New York, largely ignored it; others, like Florida and Ohio, the states that, respectively, decided the past two Presidential elections, invested in systems that were, in many cases, less reliable than the old ones.

This week, a majority of the Justices will likely find a way to make a bad situation worse, and uphold the Indiana law. As a general matter, in recent years the Court has been reluctant to find what is charged in this case: a violation of the constitutional guarantee of equal protection of the laws. (The notable exception, to belabor the issue, was for a plaintiff named George W. Bush.) In the end, though, it will not be the judiciary that rescues democracy; whatever the obstacles, the problems with the ballot box must be solved at the ballot box. ♦

[ED]

[lazarus]

this is how it is done

the elite meet. they decide on the results. multiple polls a day before are designed to be in agreement with their proposed results, INCLUDING A POLL THAT ONLY A FEW DAYS EARLIER HAD RP AT 14% (MENTIONED ON LENO), online polls are reset and jammed so that there are hard to access (i experienced this this am), then the results come out in agreement

BUT THEY FORGOT TO RIGG THE VOTES AGAINST DENNIS! THEY SCREWED UP!

L

[LIbertAS]

with 89% reporting and Obama as well as Clinton getting barely more than Ron Paul something doesn't seem right there, and Kucinich is kicking ass?

[Dig]

Vote Fraud Expert Warns Of New Hampshire Chicanery
Key vulnerabilities of Diebold machine identified within ten minutes by programmer
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010808_vote_fraud.htm
Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet Tuesday, January 8, 2008        



"It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes." Joseph Stalin.

Vote fraud expert Bev Harris has warned that New Hampshire's electronic voting machines are wide open to fraud and that even modestly skilled computer programmers were able to identify key vulnerabilities within ten minutes of assessing them as key Democrat and Republican primaries unfold today. The contract for programming all of New Hampshire's Diebold voting machines, which combined will count 81 per cent of the vote today, is owned by LHS Associates, which also holds the contracts for Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont. LHS is owned by John Silvestro, who has been at the center of a long-running public dispute in trying to deflect accusations made by hacker Harri Hursti that the machines can easily be rigged.
 
"The exact same make, model and version hacked in the Black Box Voting project in Leon County is used throughout New Hampshire, where about 45 percent of elections administrators hand count paper ballots at the polling place, with the remaining locations all using the Diebold version 1.94w optical scan machine," writes Harris. One area of disagreement between Hursti and Silvestro was the amount of expertise needed to exploit the Diebold 1.94w optical scan system. Silvestro claimed (in a strange contortion of reasoning) that he doesn't hire very skilled programmers, implying that this makes New Hampshire elections more secure.  Hursti pointed out that hiring programmers with a lack of knowledge is generally not considered a security feature, and also that an average high schooler can learn to exploit the system in two days to two weeks.

In this You Tube video, Silvestro constantly interrupts Hursti's testimony in front of the New Hampshire legislative.

 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiiaBqwqkXs

After purchasing a Diebold 1.94w machine, a computer repair shop employee picked at random by Black Box Voting was able to zero in on the system's vulnerable memory card within just ten minutes. Harris points out that LHS is a private company that will count over four fifths of the New Hampshire vote with no oversight whatsoever.

LHS is not subject to public records requirements, as the government is, at least, not in New Hampshire. The control over memory card contents is absolute; when cards malfunction or get lost, LHS brings the replacements. Since LHS maintains the machines, repairs the machines, and replaces the machines -- often on Election Day -- when they malfunction, they have intimate access to the chips, sockets, ports, communications devices and other electronic components.

A recent CNN report featured on Lou Dobbs' show highlights just how easy it is to hack a voting machine and change how votes are tallied with just rudimentary programming skills. Experts warn that it takes only a minute for an unsupervised machine to be inserted with a virus and hacked.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=261IlYmisyE

[LIbertAS]

Maybe it will take a week to finish counting like in Iowa, lol what a joke this has become.

[den carts]

Duncan hunter with 7%? wtf? The dude doesn't even want to be president.
Ron Paul with only 5%? are we in a twilight zone?

On the democratic side edwards and kucinich the big winners, obama clinton and everyone else with less than 6% wtF??? I thought obama was the big winner.

Heres my screenshot

[LIbertAS]

Now it's 100% reporting lol

[Dig]

Bev Harris: Iowa Caucus Had Vote Fraud
http://www.roguegovernment.com/news.php?id=5902
01-07-2008 Black Box Voting

The Republican caucuses usually take only half as long as the Democratic caucuses, due to simpler procedures. Yet the Republicans are lagging behind the Democrats now by over TEN HOURS in having all their results in. Results delays are a red flag.

Alert CSPAN watchers caught TV screen shots of Giuliani vote totals going down by a couple thousand votes midstream in, I believe it was, Linn County. That needs a confirm; screen shot images were posted on various blogs, but if anyone recorded the coverage and can corroborate those screen shots, please let us know.

As many of us know, vote totals that go DOWN during the middle of the count can be an error, but also can signal an election theft tactic whereby votes from a candidate finishing very low in the pack are skimmed off and given to a favored candidate higher in the pack. If corroborated, the vote total shift will be another red flag.

And with the Republican race, I wouldn't look first at fraud in the number one position. I'd look for it in the area of repositioning candidates in the second through sixth spot.

- The delay in results is a red flag.

- The vote totals going down during the count is a red flag.

- The failure to release county results in live time, as promised in a Republican Party press release on Jan. 2, is a red flag.

- The failure to release precinct totals at all is a corrupt procedure. Note that the day before the caucuses, after much pressure, the Republicans did (belatedly) promise to release the precinct results on election night. They didn't.

In addition: I'm trying to get information on whether the public was kicked out of the room during hand counting in all locations, or just some.

I will be publishing some reports by caucus attendees in the "Front Lines" section later today.

There is absolutely no reason to consider any of the Republican caucus results to be credible.

I'm not saying they are wrong, I am saying the breakdown in checks and balances was stunning enough to call it not a magic show, but a bad magic show.