BULLETIN ITEM: HOW THE U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS ARE RIGGED WITH
A
LOADED SHOTGUN
From various angles I have come to the conclusion that the perfectly
obvious is perfectly obvious. The elections have been rigged in very
clever ways. There are 21 counties in Florida where there will be
electronic voting with no recourse to a paper trail for a recount if
required.
This is a Jeb Bush imposition in obvious and direct violation of
Florida law, which requires the ability to recount votes. This
means that
the elections for President in Florida in those 21 counties will be
illegal and the issue of what to do with those votes will have to be
decided
by the Florida legislature. Depending upon the nature of the
challenges, the issue may be deadlocked into the Florida Supreme Court
and then
into the, GASP, shotgun of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The fat-ass lazy Democratic careerists and their legion of 10,000
lawyers have walked right into this one. Where is the Democratic
National
Chairman? Fire him.
The ONLY THING which will offset this nifty Jeb Bush boobytrap will be
enough vote in the rest of the U.S. to swamp out the need for Florida's
electoral votes.
BUT, there are several other states which have some counties with the
same trojan horse voting machines. There will probably be a
second tier
of vote-rigging in some manner with some of those machines. If
Diebold
has its name on any of them, those votes will have grounds for
challenge because WE DO IN FACT ALREADY KNOW THAT THE TROJAN HORSE IS
IN THEIR SOFTWARE. Interestingly, such challenges could be
undertaken by
Republicans wherever there is a large Kerry turn out which is larger
than the
expected polls.!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They can merely cite the known
issues related to the trojan horse software.
This could force more than one state into its legislature for final
determination of whose electors won. Here the odds are heavily stacked
against the Democrats, the Pentacostal cults have been focused for the
last ten years on taking over state legislatures and they control a lot
more of them than Democrats.
So what we already know about the ballotless machines is that this
knowledge is a very wicked witch indeed.
All this raises the issue, will we get a valid election?. This is
an
astutely good question and tens of thousands if not millions of people
are already wondering. IF THE TURNOUT IS LARGE ENOUGH FOR KERRY,
IT
WILL PROBABLY OVERCOME THE FIX. BUT IF IT IS A CLIFFHANGER, AS MOST OF
THE MEDIA IS TRYING TO CONVINCE YOU IT IS, THEN WE ARE IN FOR THE MOST
INTERESTING AND UNPREDICTABLE POLITICAL STRUGGLE THE U.S. HAS SEEN
SINCE THE EARLY 1930'S.
From: "kimber"
Subject: What if?
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:01:50 -0700
Below is an article by Barbara Ehrenreich. She raises the question of
what do we do if Kerry wins, and Bush gets appointed again.
The most important point raised by one of her friends is: we have to
win it first. It is conceivable we won't (42% of our citizens identify
as
evangelicals or born again). But if we win the popular vote -- and Bush
is "elected" -- what then? ... I think there's little question that many
groups will hit the street: all the multitude of left groups that
organized the peace marches; probably Move-On, ACT, etc. -- but what
about the
Dem Party whose candidate will have won the election and has the
machinery/money to tap into the outrage of the millions who voted for
Kerry? ... Since
you folks (actually I don't know who in our leadership) are the ones
working most closely with the Dem Party around here -- and they have
contact
with state/national leadership -- perhaps some discussion should begin
now.
The most horrifying (and unknown) scene in Fahrenheit for me was the
Black
Caucus being gavelled down by Al Gore as it tried to challenge the 2000
election. (Ehrenreich mentions that scene too -- but she doesn't think
the Dem Pty will do anything. I think they'll not easily surrender
their
future a second time; in fact, probably their demise). ... Anyway,
keeping in
mind the original caveat: that Kerry wins, what then?
----------------------------------------------------
Published in the October, 2004 issue of The Progressive
To Catch a Thief
by Barbara Ehrenreich
We were six toasts into the wedding dinner when the conversation
turned, as conversations usually do, to the possibility of a Republican
theft of
the election in November. "That's when we hit the streets!" declared
the
Cuban American community organizer from Pennsylvania. "Yeah!" bellowed
the retired
union president from Long Island, and we all pounded the table and
raised our
glasses yet again: "Everybody hit the streets!"
The streets must be feeling pretty threatened by this time, because the
idea of a Republican-engineered election fraud is no longer the
property of
the kind of people who think George W. designed 9/11 and that John
Kerry is
a Halliburton-supplied bot containing batteries set to run out on
October 15.
Following the wedding, I took an absolutely unscientific poll of
friends and relatives, asking what they planned to do, and what they
thought others
should do, in the event of a 2000 election hoax rerun. Everyone seemed
to
think this is a real possibility. My sister, for example, an office
worker in
Colorado, e-mailed to say, "Funny, I've been thinking about that . . .
Ever since
[2000], I've thought, 'How could we let this happen? Why didn't we--the
majority--hit the streets in indignation?' "
Not everyone wants to rush outdoors with a picket sign. One nephew, who
manages a fast food joint in Oklahoma, writes that the answer is "one
word: RECALL." But my brother, a realtor in Missouri, doesn't want to
bother
with any more voting machines. In the event of massive fraud, he
writes, "It would be
time for a 'New Revolution'! . . . Hopefully peaceful, but I wouldn't
rule
out anything."
Steve Cobble, a D.C.-based political operative who's worked for Jesse
Jackson Sr., told me, "We have to have plans to research the [election]
results
ASAP, while hitting the streets immediately." Among my activist
friends, the
only exception to the hit-the-streets line has been Bob Borosage of
Campaign
for America's Future, who says, "As for stealing the election, I think
we
better win it first."
Yes, of course, by all means. But no matter how many people we register
and drive to the polls, the possibilities for monkey business are
numerous
and arcane. Among them:
* Computer fraud, especially in places offering touch screen voting
without a paper trail (although a paper trail is no guarantee of
accuracy if it's
generated by the same screwed-up software as the touch screen votes).
It's particularly worrisome that at least two of the companies that
provide
computerized voting machines--Diebold and InterCivic--have strong ties
to the
Republican Party.
* Selective discouragement of easily identifiable Democratic voters,
i.e., black ones, such as occurred in Florida in 2000. Already, John
Pappageorge, a Republican state legislator in Michigan, has urged his
party to take
measures to "suppress the Detroit vote." Plainclothes officers from the
Florida
state police have been trying to intimidate elderly black voters by
going to
their homes and interrogating them about their status as voters.
* Relying on the Pentagon to forward e-mail votes from troops in combat
zones to their local election offices, as Missouri and North Dakota are
planning to do. As The New York Times has editorialized, this creates a
situation
"rife with security problems."
* And, the most lurid of all, declaring a red alert and postponing the
election, a possibility already floated as a trial balloon by Tom Ridge.
In the weeks remaining to us, prevention may be the best medicine, and
all sorts of groups are gearing up to guard against a coup. Common
Cause
and People for the American Way, among others, are mobilizing to oppose
touch
screen voting and to increase the ranks of poll watchers. The
Democratic Party
has lined up 2,000 lawyers in case of dodgy-looking results and is
bringing the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to monitor
our election for the first time ever. Taking the foreign monitor theme
one step further,
the feisty folks at Global Exchange have invited their own twenty-eight
nonpartisan foreign observers. All over the country, local Democrats
and citizens'
groups like Count Every Vote 2004 are preparing for a heavy presence at
the
polls.
But if the preventive measures fail to produce a credible election,
don't expect the Democratic Party to lead the fight for democracy. The
most
painful scene in Fahrenheit 9/11--and there are quite a few contenders
for this
title--is the one in which members of the Congressional Black Caucus
speak to the
Senate, one by one, pleading for just one Senator to join them in
stopping the
Supreme Court's selection of Bush. When faced with a
truly revolutionary
situation--an electoral coup from the right--Al Gore folded like a lawn
chair. As for
Kerry: He may have had some backbone thirty years ago, but too many
years spent sitting in the Senate have rendered it the consistency of
Play-Doh.
So we're on our own, folks--those of us who still hold to the idea that
our leaders should be elected rather than perpetuated by fraud. In
addition
to all the poll monitoring, touch screen protesting, etc., we need two
things.
First, some agreed-upon group to declare the election fair or
fraudulent. This
may not be an easy or obvious call, according to my friend the political
scientist Frances Fox Piven: "If this election is stolen, it will be
stolen at
the most local level, and we won't know right away." Maybe the OSCE can
be
relied on to pass judgment, or maybe the ACLU should be appointed to do
the job,
with MoveOn spreading the word.
Second, we need a plan of action for the all-too-likely event that the
election is determined to be tainted. "Hitting the streets" sounds
good, but if we each do it on our own, the neighbors will just conclude
that we're
taking out the recycling or assessing our leaf-raking issues. Asked
what we should
do, Linda Burnham, of Count Every Vote 2004, suggests people start
planning
now for local demonstrations at election boards. Piven recommends
nationwide
protests that are both "nonviolent and disruptive," possibly on
inauguration
day. John Cavanagh, director of the Institute for Policy Studies,
writes: "On
February 15, 2003, over ten million people in over 600 cities around
the world
took to the streets to say no to Bush's [war on Iraq.] Another stolen
election
will require coordinated efforts like this, on a larger and more
sustained
basis, until the stolen goods are returned. Mega-networks like United
for Peace and
Justice, which played a central role in February 15 as well as the
recent
mass march at the Republican Convention, will need to retool so they
can play a
central role."
All this sounds good to me--local planning for local responses and
national coordination by a trusted group like United for Peace and
Justice. But
we have to get started, well, last week. Democratic voters need to be
assured
that some of us won't take another coup lying down. And Republican
dirty-tricksters need to start feeling the first shivers of fear. If
all the people who
are saying they're willing to hit the streets actually do so, there
won't
be a lot of people left indoors to wait tables, teach school, or pay
taxes during
W's second term.
Barbara Ehrenreich is the author of "Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting
By in America" and "Blood Rites: Origins and History of the Passions of
War."