Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumThom Hartmann: Why it's not crazy to think Anonymous stopped Karl Rove From Stealing the Election P2
If you think it's crazy that Karl Rove tried to steal the election this year only to be thwarted by Anonymous - then you haven't been paying attention to the last 50 years of American history. Tune in...what do Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, both Bushes, and maybe even Mitt Romney have in common - besides all being Republicans?
The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann on RT TV & FSTV "live" 9pm and 11pm check www.thomhartmann.com/tv for local listings
niyad
(113,323 posts)happened, and pretty well had it figured out. too bad there is no way to undo these treasonous acts.
xfundy
(5,105 posts)I wish he'd mentioned the mess Blackwell created in Ohio in
04.
niyad
(113,323 posts)Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)things I have read coming from what passes for "DU'ers" regarding the lies, obfuscation and doubt where it comes to the idea that Anonymous stopped the election from being stolen. SMDH
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Bastards
Overseas
(12,121 posts)When I heard of Rove being upset and Romney not conceding, I thought the software patch must have failed.
Some other people think that the trigger in the patch was not pulled because they knew it was being closely monitored by FBI cyber-security and other independent monitors.
Here is a lot more detail in a video summary and text:
http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2012/4824
Rove wouldn't mind if some sort of Anonymous clone falsely claimed credit for stopping the vote flipping along the wrong route.
KegCreekDem
(75 posts)thank you Thom Hartmann for getting this truth out.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Actually, it wasn't even possible, but that did not stop the misinformation.
This has been thoroughly rehashed over and over again on DU. Nonetheless, it keeps resurfacing.
The first sentence is FALSE. Smartech reported the votes on the WWW. The counties counted them, reported to the State of Ohio, and later reported their official counts. The county totals are available online still and you can see them yourself. Even county precinct totals are available. Counties counted and repoprted precinct level results.
KegCreekDem
(75 posts)What is your motivation? Are you really so naive to think that the Koch Brothers millions wouldn't be used to hack the election?
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)The German Federal Constitutional Court decided on 3 March 2009 that electronic voting used for the last 10 years, including for the 2005 general elections, was unconstitutional and therefore not to be used for the next elections in September 2009.
The court ruled that the use of the electronic machines contradicts the public nature of elections and the equipment used in 2005 had some shortcomings. However, as there has been no evidence of errors in the past, the results of the previous elections remain valid.
A petition signed by over 45 000 people in 2005, trying to ban e-voting, had been rejected by the German Government. Now, the court ruled that the Federal Voting Machines Ordinance having introduced e-voting was unconstitutional because it did not "ensure that only such voting machines are permitted and used which meet the constitutional requirements of the principle of the public nature of elections."
Also the court considered that, differently from the traditional voting system where manipulations and frauds are much more difficult involving a high degree of effort and a high risk of detection, "programming errors in the software or deliberate electoral fraud committed by manipulating the software of electronic voting machines can be recognised only with difficulty." Also, in the court's opinion, the electors should be able to verify how their vote is recorded without having to possess detailed computer knowledge. "If the election result is determined through computer-controlled processing of the votes stored in an electronic memory, it is not sufficient if merely the result of the calculation process carried out in the voting machine can be taken note of by means of a summarising printout or an electronic display."
Conspiracy Theories
Cass R. Sunstein
Adrian Vermeule
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585
A broader point is that conspiracy theories overestimate the competence and
discretion of officials and bureaucracies, who are assumed to be able to make and carry
out sophisticated secret plans, despite abundant evidence that in open societies
government action does not usually remain secret for very long.20 Recall that a distinctive
feature of conspiracy theories is that they attribute immense power to the agents of the
conspiracy; the attribution is usually implausible but also makes the theories especially
vulnerable to challenge. Consider all the work that must be done to hide and to cover up
the governments role in producing a terrorist attack on its own territory, or in arranging
to kill political opponents. In a closed society, secrets are not difficult to keep, and
distrust of official accounts makes a great deal of sense. In such societies, conspiracy
theories are both more likely to be true and harder to show to be false in light of available
information.21 But when the press is free, and when checks and balances are in force,
government cannot easily keep its conspiracies hidden for long. These points do not mean
that it is logically impossible, even in free societies, that conspiracy theories are true. But
it does mean that institutional checks make it unlikely, in such societies, that powerful
groups can keep dark secrets for extended periods, at least if those secrets involve
important events with major social salience.
~snip~
Whenever a bad event has occurred, rumors and speculation are inevitable. Most
people are not able to know, on the basis of personal or direct knowledge, why an
airplane crashed, or why a leader was assassinated, or why a terrorist attack succeeded. In
the aftermath of such an event, numerous speculations will be offered, and some of them
will likely point to some kind of conspiracy. To some people, those speculations will
seem plausible, perhaps because they provide a suitable outlet for outrage and blame,
perhaps because the speculation fits well with other deeply rooted beliefs that they hold.
Terrible events produce outrage, and when people are outraged, they are all the more
likely to attribute those events to intentional action. In addition, antecedent beliefs are a
key to the success or failure of conspiracy theories. Some people would find it impossibly
jarring to think that the CIA was responsible for the assassination of a civil rights leader;
that thought would unsettle too many of their other judgments. Others would find those
other judgments strongly supported, even confirmed, by the suggestion that the CIA was
responsible for such an assassination. Compare the case of terrorist attacks. For most
Americans, a claim that the United States government attacked its own citizens, for some
ancillary purpose, would make it impossible to hold onto a wide range of other
judgments. Clearly this point does not hold for many people in Islamic nations, for whom
it is far from jarring to believe that responsibility lies with the United States (or Israel).
Here, as elsewhere, people attempt to find some kind of equilibrium among their
assortment of beliefs,34 and acceptance or rejection of a conspiracy theory will often
depend on which of the two leads to equilibrium. Some beliefs are also motivated, in the
sense that people are pleased to hold them or displeased to reject them.35 Acceptance (or
for that matter rejection) of a conspiracy theory is frequently motivated in that sense.
Reactions to a claim of conspiracy to assassinate a political leader, or to commit or to
allow some atrocity either domestically or abroad, are often determined by the
motivations of those who hear the claim.
For those keeping score, the authors of HAVA have:
Been convicted of bribery and corruption for deals with Jack Abramoff and sentenced to 30 months in prison- Rep. Bob Ney
Been convicted of money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering to get repub candidates elected, and have received a sentence of three years in prison (and has yet to serve a day)- Rep. Tom DeLay (See also DeLay's ties to Abramoff.)
Run for President (poorly)- Sen. Chris Dodd. Dodd was also a "Friend of Angelo" Mozillo of Countrywide.
Business and financial ties through the McCarthy Group with ES&S, the company that had a monopoly on vote counting in the US- Sen. Chuck Hagel
"When it can be established that when a number of political acts work in concert to produce a certain result, the presumption is strong that the actors were aiming at the result in question. When it can be shown that the actors have an interest in producing these results, the presumptions become a fair certainty- no conspiracy theory is needed." -Walter Karp, Indispensable Enemies
cprise
(8,445 posts)...creates a far higher likelihood of detecting vote fraud than is possible in a computer system where information is almost infinitely malleable.
Computerization is not appropriate for every type of problem. Secret ballot voting is one of those domains were computers create more problems than they solve.
I remember donating to the Florida NAACP when they announced they were mounting a legal effort against vote fraud in the 2000 election. Soon afterward they enthusiastically chomped at the bit that Diebold offered, and threw their support behind computerized voting as a fix. Right then I recognized some of the implications and was beside myself, hand to face, when I read about it in the news. They were not fixing the potential for another voting fiasco, but helping bury it.
I'm flabbergasted at this excerpt you posted. Thank you!
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)because he fell hook, line and sinker for a baseless conspiracy theory. Now he has to try and recover some credibility!
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)despite not having evidence of fraud:
http://www.edri.org/edri-gram/number7.5/no-evoting-germany
The German Federal Constitutional Court decided on 3 March 2009 that electronic voting used for the last 10 years, including for the 2005 general elections, was unconstitutional and therefore not to be used for the next elections in September 2009.
The court ruled that the use of the electronic machines contradicts the public nature of elections and the equipment used in 2005 had some shortcomings. However, as there has been no evidence of errors in the past, the results of the previous elections remain valid.
A petition signed by over 45 000 people in 2005, trying to ban e-voting, had been rejected by the German Government. Now, the court ruled that the Federal Voting Machines Ordinance having introduced e-voting was unconstitutional because it did not "ensure that only such voting machines are permitted and used which meet the constitutional requirements of the principle of the public nature of elections."
Also the court considered that, differently from the traditional voting system where manipulations and frauds are much more difficult involving a high degree of effort and a high risk of detection, "programming errors in the software or deliberate electoral fraud committed by manipulating the software of electronic voting machines can be recognised only with difficulty." Also, in the court's opinion, the electors should be able to verify how their vote is recorded without having to possess detailed computer knowledge. "If the election result is determined through computer-controlled processing of the votes stored in an electronic memory, it is not sufficient if merely the result of the calculation process carried out in the voting machine can be taken note of by means of a summarising printout or an electronic display."
Silly Germans with their baseless conspiracy theories. They should be more trusting of their government.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)But, what if everyone could read and test the code?
Then wouldn't e-counting of paper ballots be acceptable if audited too when demanded?
There is no government, just real people doing government jobs and functions!
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Well, we don't have that. We have outsourced a government function to a private, partisan corporation that uses secret, proprietary code to count votes.
Kinda funny that someone who criticizes "baseless conspiracy theories" uses a hypothetical as support for their argument.
kooljerk666
(776 posts)that's all..................
oh yea agree 110%
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)We are, after all, discussing what is wrong with a specific election conspiracy theory. You can assume I know the basic facts. What is in dispute is the non-factual.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)When the possibility exists for tampering in electronic voting, claiming Anonymous did not tamper with electronic voting is impossible unless you can prove (1) electronic voting cannot be tampered, and (2) that Anonymous could not tamper with the elections.
I await your empirical evidence. No hypotheticals, please.
cprise
(8,445 posts)...for which they can have chips made to order. There is no way to examine the logic within a VLSI microchip once it has been manufactured. It is a MUCH bigger problem than software.
It would be almost trivial to include a few 'malfunctioning' logic gates among billions of others in today's chips without them being detected.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)to defend e-voting and cast doubt on GOP election buggery?
What's you agenda mister?
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Thom was making the point -- which obviously is lost on you --- that election
buggery by GOP is basically in their DNA. I didn't know about the LBJ tape
until I saw this clip. This is great background information, not "back-peddling"
as you claim.
I for one, am thoroughly delighted that Thom is taking this seriously and
covering it well.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Thom did this third tape for the benefit of obtuse nay-sayers carping
about the whole issue of vote-rigging in OH by Rove, and it's possible
interception with a firewall by Anon this year, as being unworthy of
people's attention. That's YOU Coyoti.
But obviously Thom's efforts to provide context & background have had
no discernible effect on your "head-in-the-sand" demeanor. whatever.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Everyone else already knew all that third tape, or they had their heads in the sand all this while.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)leveled against an honest & skilled journalist, who is simply
providing background and context ... yes, for those of you
who still have your head in the sand <-- so you got that
part right.
Otherwise, why do you say you know those things, yet act like
you don't know those things? .. i.e. like suggesting it's a
silly CT to think Rove tried to steal OH, or that Anon may have
helped to prevent that?
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Until there is some evidence, it really is SILLY. How was Rove going to do it?
Please provide some indication of how that can be done, something other than "it is on the WWW" please.
Regarding 2004, I proved it was stolen and cooperated with State of Ohio after the election by providing my evidence to the State. So I know how and who and when and where. And I do NOT like silly CTs to be floated as cover-ups to the real facts.
The Smartech meme is BULLSHIT. The 2012 story is BULLSHIT. Hartmann is in over his head because these false memes are not questioned by him. Thom Hartmann has become a disinformation tool, conscious or not.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)There's proof that the primaries in many states, including Ohio, were electronically flipped.
Personally, I believe the evidence to be absolute proof beyond any shadow of doubt. I beieve this because I understand that a miracle would be required to produce these results naturally. I am not convinced that God's plan guided his team to produce victory after victory, over four seperate front runners, while each time perfectly mimmicking results that can only be caused by electronic flipping of votes.
What standard of proof would satisfy you enough for you to admit publicly that the Anonymous claim is plausible?
You do not appear to be swayed by a preponderance of the evidence.
http://markcrispinmiller.com/2012/10/how-many-flipped-votes-helped-romney-win-his-partys-nomination/
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Here's a compendium of numerous news reports on this, including Maddow
(which is ultimately spun to support Ron Paul as the "defender of liberty" but
never-the-less, these news reports were actual footage.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)In a fair election, he might easily have won against Obama. He would have gotten the racist vote that Romney received, plus he could have drawn a lot of the young vote that isn't familiar with the racist history of his ideology. He would have been formidable, especially with someone like Gov. Christy as a running mate.
The reason Ron Paul was not allowed to win, he was never acceptable to These Guys.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)why are you not testifying before Congress, or calling up Thom Hartmann for
an interview to "set him straight" on the "real" story?
If you are so intent on calling Thom's reporting BULLSHIT, then prove it.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)It's obvious to everyone that the Anonymous claim is very plausible. I'm beginning to suspect "head-in-the-sand" demeanor may be too kind. Something more disturbing could be driving this irrational reaction to the story. Especially when you couple the denial with the mocking and ridicule. One has to wonder. But at least your getting more than emoticons for a response, which looks like progress to me.
Carry on.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)thank you for beaming some lightness & sanity into the
conversation.
Yes, the ferocity and hyper-persistence of some is intriguing.
One wonders about what all is going on behind that keyboard.
drynberg
(1,648 posts)Whadda we do now? How do we make our elections clean in the future. Maybe the private voting machines are a good place to start cleaning house...and then paper ballots with a trail that can be hand counted with supervision of all parties. So, how do we get this ball rolling? Cause we gotta start NOW!
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Us "old timers' on the election integrity front are already organized,
in places where there is more than just talk, of course.
Festivito
(13,452 posts)It's fine to have corporate media, but we need other sources as well. Privately funded to protect our money interests. Publicly funded to protect our people and our votes.
amywalk
(254 posts)bonniebgood
(943 posts)believe this to be true. Pick your poison. sex scandal or treason?
reusrename
(1,716 posts)global1
(25,251 posts)Petreaus was made to pay for it by facing a scandal instead of facing a firing squad for 'treason'. And if this was Tom talking about Benghazi and how it played into the 2012 election - he might had said the American People couldn't handle a story about 'treason' so they discredited Petreaus by using a sex scandal. After all Petreaus was the head of CIA.
iandhr
(6,852 posts)They are just pretending to be relevant.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Too many holes that can't be patched over in this story.
When the fraudsters are exposed, they can claim they saved Obama because Rove was afraid to act.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,174 posts)I know you seem to enjoy making a joke out of election stealing, but for many of us on DU, this is no joke.
And constantly using your favorite smiley does nothing more than make you seem like a bully on the school yard trying to belittle anyone who doesn't suck up to you.
Its as if some of you are convinced that even the word "conspiracy" is some made up word that has no meaning in the English dictionary.
Maybe you watch too much Sci-Fi channel, I don't know.
RC
(25,592 posts)did no wrong?
We have in this country, Republican manufactured, owned, operated and programed electronic voting machines, where these Republican owners are on the record of electing Republicans wherever possible.
What's not to get? It is obvious something went very wrong for Karl Rove this recent past election. Something more happened, or rather didn't happen, that was planned to happen, besides Obama swamping out the "Fix" this election.
Anonymous is not a single entity, but a loose group of like minded people. Maybe they "know too much" and like their freedom. Maybe they just like living. Whatever, it doesn't really matter. We now know enough to start real investigations into our elections, but it takes time to get organized.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)You realize my being skeptical does not mean you should assume I am not!
On edit: P.S. We election integrity activists have been organized since 2004, doing things like producing films and academic work on the topic.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)On the Internet, anyone can claim to be an "election integrity activist."
One can do so without a shred of proof.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)But can you watch their election integrity films on the internet?
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Since you're doing nothing but babbling, I will assume you don't have any.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)that the original Anon/Rove story has one scintilla of truth, not to mention some evidence.
And, no, I do not reveal my public ID on this forum, so take my word for it. I have two election integrity film credits plus academic studies.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Other than ad hominen attacks against Thom Hartmann and Anonymous, you haven't produced anything to support your argument.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)OTOH...
cui bono
(19,926 posts)So do you think it's okay to hold them to do something you refuse to do yourself?
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)in all likelihood. Even so, noone is saying identify yourself.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)If I were Anon, I wouldn't provide the proof.
I would have already gotten the exact result needed.
Why give anyone a lead on my identity?
Does the names Bradley Manning and Julian Assange mean anything to you?
Why play their game (and apparently your game too) and take unnecessary risks when there is absolutely no need to do so?
Kudos to Anon!
& as a result of Manning & many others who RISKED their lives to expose the TRUTH; they will NEVER be forgotten! AS far as Bradley Manning is concern he risked his life for Americans to know the TRUTH about WAR MONGERS like EVIL Senator McCain!
Sadly, it doesn't make us much DIFFERENT FROM THE PEOPLE McCain CONDEMNS!
Response to iandhr (Reply #12)
bvar22 This message was self-deleted by its author.
barbtries
(28,798 posts)deutsey
(20,166 posts)I think an important reason so many people can find it feasible that it happened that way is our trust in the integrity of the electoral system has been completely compromised since 2000.
As a nation, we need to do all that we can to restore that trust and integrity.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Clearly, you haven't been listening to the sensible posters at DU.
There are NEW RULES:
You MUST Prove It before you can discuss the possibility that this might have happened,
or the ramifications of Anon's claim demonstrating the vulnerability of our Privatized, Secret, Opaque, unverifiable elections.
[font size=7]PROVE IT,[/font]
beyond the doubt of the most hardened, conservative, establishment mouth piece at DU,
[font size=7]or STFU, Thom![/font]
[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]
[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)Thank you for clarifying that. I was getting a little confused, wrong-headedly
imagining we actually DISCUSS things on DU, look at possibilities, weigh evidence,
etc. This "new rule" will really come in handy when I disagree with what someone
else posts. NOW I can just say ... "PROVE IT NOW!!! ..or STFU!!!"
That won't take nearly as many brain cells as actually deliberating issues.
What a relief.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)No need to even prove anything unless you make unbelievable, extraordinary claims, of course.
Pbs1914
(147 posts)How many threads are you on now spewing the same Bs regarding this same topic? 10? 20?
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)I hope I didn't miss one. But hey, start another.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Sorry, I should have looked at the history before voting to leave it.
#4
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Sometimes they know not to whom they speak.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)I appreciate it.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)not a chance As long as there are people trying to sell snake oil around here ....
reusrename
(1,716 posts)Why no comment?
RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)I'm sorry, but I don't think that any one of us should have to write a networking manual for anyone. People wouldn't understand it. These things are complicated, and Anonymous uses colorful language to describe it. Sometimes archaic, but colorful.
I don't understand why these people keep insisting that Anonymous reveal their code, and paint a great big target on their back.
The concepts of advanced networking are not for the uninitiated into the field. Most of our techs don't understand how a lot of this stuff works. No matter how simple it's explained to them.
So unless you are a network administrator, network technician, systems programmer, or the like, YOU should STFU!
Samantha
(9,314 posts)and any other material you might have on his participation in the "taking" of the 2000 election. It never ceases to amaze me that people like Jeb Bush think that given time people will "get over it" or just not remember what has happened in the past. If he does in fact run, he is going to see just how wrong he is about that.
Sam
elleng
(130,948 posts)and Dems haven't wanted to mention it.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Dems don't mention torture, habeas corpus, Fourth Amendment violations, or drone strikes either.
snot
(10,529 posts)I'm tempted to add, "PROVE that the Dems in power give a genuine rat's *ss about the 99% or STFU."
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)Funny how certain things never make it onto "the list".
- Codified Bush's warrantless wiretapping
- Increased drone strikes
- Stated it is okay to assassinate American citizens
- Deported the most undocumented workers
- Made backroom deals with big pharma and the "health" insurance companies
- Squandered all the energized supporters dedication once elected by making deals with corporations
- Gave a handout to the big banks rather than to the people
There's more I'm sure, but this gets you a big STFU on here if you bring any of this up. It also gets a bunch of threads started for the sole purpose of ridiculing anyone who dares mention things of this nature or concerns of possible future shortcomings.
And never do I see the actual discussion of policies, just snarky replies by the "club" whose intent seems to just be dividing DU and not allowing discussion.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)the damaging effects of "Free Trade" on America's Working Class
or
The Failed and very expensive War on Drugs
or
The Militarization and National Coordination of our local Police Departments
or
the coordinated suppression of legal protests
or
Don Seigelman....(Don WHO?)
or
War Crimes & War Criminals
or
Torture
or
The expanding "private" Prison Industrial Complex
or
The successful Emerging Populist Democracies in Latin America
or
US support for one of the few remaining Right Wing Death Squad Oligarchies in Latin America (Colombia)
Gosh, there sure are a lot of things that don't get talked about today.
[font color=firebrick size=3][center]"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone[/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]
[font size=5 color=firebrick]Solidarity![/font]
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)I really enjoy hearings, Watergate, Iran-Contra, USA Firings, etc. And, as a Dem, I enjoy watching Republican sentencing hearings.
I'm a Dem and I mention it. So your argument just FAILED!
elleng
(130,948 posts)who have chosen, over the years, as noted by Hartmann, NOT to mention it.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Not really a good way to have discourse. That attitude has become a real problem on this site.
applegrove
(118,677 posts)were on deck to help Mitt get elected, we are back to the default position where one conspiracy after another is started amongst democrats. This serves only to alienate dems from each other, as is the aim.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)if Dems would simply shut up, get in line, display their loyalty, and stop questioning the authority of the government and its institutions.
You know, like RWers do when Republicans are in office.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)their loyalty to some poster on here with awesome intellect and intelligence that cannot be disputed without a long running segment on how they, the disputers, cannot see the obvious logic of the awesome intellects and intelligences of some posters when disputing something or someone like say.......anonymous and the hack/antihack claims?
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Quit mumbling. I can't understand a word you're saying.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)not to mention nail, hammer, head
of your opinions, you and the other poster, mean ZERO to me. Your inability to understand that you are in the minority reminds me of a rethug nominee in our recent election. Go Anonymous!
applegrove
(118,677 posts)votes there would be a massive criminal investigation. And there is not. I'm noticing a pattern. When the primaries and election were on, and republicans were otherwise engaged, the consipiracy theories on the DU were rare.
Sadiedog
(353 posts)applegrove
(118,677 posts)up the fight in the courts. He opted not to pursue further court action when the Supremes came down with their decision (for what he thought was the good of the country but which proved not to be). Which he regretted. Since then Democrats have learnt they have to fight like mad and never, ever give in, because the GOP always will fight through any means necessary.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)You make several unsupported claims based on speculation in the above post, #56.
If you have PROOF of your claims, you should post it NOW and stop hiding behind an anonymous screen name.
applegrove
(118,677 posts)to pursue the Supreme's decision in courts. That is how the election was stolen in 2000.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)He would have been taken down with the the twin towers and President Lieberman would have gone to war with Islam instead of Dubya.
Things might have been much worse than they were, had things gone the other way. In either event, it was heads they win, tails we lose.
applegrove
(118,677 posts)reusrename
(1,716 posts)I'm saying that it wasn't going to happen.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)into the Iraq war, or torture, or domestic surveillance, or mortgage fraud.
I'm noticing a pattern, too...
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)something that requires you to be the director of the FBI or something like that to have the info needed to so assert. I'm guessing you are just saying stuff without evidence on this front.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)annoying little pest.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)bullshit storm like this hits
Response to Coyotl (Reply #52)
Post removed
bvar22
(39,909 posts)You insist that:
[font color=red] "all hands were were on deck to help Mitt get elected, we are back to the default position where one conspiracy after another is started amongst democrats. This serves only to alienate dems from each other, as is the aim." ---applegrove, post #32[/font]
---
You and a handful of other self-appointed Hall Monitors have continuously attacked Democrats by incessantly repeating the extraordinary claim that an open discussion of the issues suppresses voter turnout and helps Republicans,
and yet you and yours have not offered the first shred of proof to support this wild claim.
[font size=4]PROVE IT, or STFU!
[/font]
After election 2012, it would appear that your claim is utter bullshit, and an open discussion of the issues actually helps INCREASE turnout.
applegrove
(118,677 posts)There was lots of evidence.
byronius
(7,395 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)treasonous? Trying to steal elections??? Want power for powers sake? could care less than shit about the 99%????Perish the thought! Anonymous can you believe this? Repukes treasonous?
calimary
(81,298 posts)track record has been, longterm. I think there's something to it, absolutely. Wouldn't be a bit surprised. If kkkarl rove's involved, suspect a rat. Suspect there's something no good afoot.
Stargleamer
(1,989 posts)yet Obama wins by 1.9%. Something strange was going on again.
psychmommy
(1,739 posts)Thanks Thom. We need to push for a heading. See Mccain could jump on this to stay relevant.
Pbs1914
(147 posts)Pbs1914
(147 posts)Pbs1914
(147 posts)Thanks so much for this. Can you send a direct link to this video so that I can show others?
Thank you
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)to those iof us paying attention to politics lo all these decades.
Response to Coyotl (Reply #65)
Post removed
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)Thanks for posting this. I watched the Carter/Reagan debates and picked out three very clear Reagan lies. I expected the Washington Post to have a headline "REAGAN LIES HIS ASS OFF", but all I got was a single paragraph at the end of an article on A-12 - "Mr. Reagan made a few mistaken assertions during the debate." I was NOT happy about that.
Snarkoleptic
(5,997 posts)cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
ProSense
(116,464 posts)In an era of internet lulz and digital false flags, we must demand proof for these sort of claims made by Anonymous. But given Karl Roves history with elections in Ohio and the known vulnerabilities with our corporate owned electronic voting machines, there may be both smoke and fire with these election night allegations.
Thats why its vitally important for Anonymous to release any information or evidence it has about this plot to not just Julian Assange, but to law enforcement authorities as well. Otherwise, the alleged democracy-saving actions of the hacktivist group will instead be regarded as useless internet antics, relegated to the dustbins of history.
http://truth-out.org/news/item/12845-anonymous-karl-rove-and-2012-election-fix
I completely agree.
If Anonymous has definitive proof that Rove tried to hack the vote, present it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021842950
Evidence is a precious commodity and demanding it shouldn't be frowned upon. Otherwise, we risk becoming them: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021861002
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)This is the fall-back position to compensate for falling for the BS in the first place.
reusrename
(1,716 posts)They were originally going to try and catch them in the act, but then they opted for just locking them out instead.
Rove and his minions were locked out (this has been reported on independently) and because of that there is no evidence of an attempt to electronically flip votes in the server logs.
In other words, if Anonymous is telling the truth, the proof you are demanding would not exist. It would have to come from some other source in some other form. They never sent the command "FLIP VOTES" because they were not able to log on.
If this really happened, I'm glad they chose this tactic. Even if they had proof of Rove's guilt, it would not change the argument one iota. The science deniers would just continue to deny just like they deny proof of electronic vote flipping in the primary.
They cry "give us some proof" and then bury their head in the sand when facts are produced.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Think about that.
THINK.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)You can commit treason and still be "legitimately elected" because of the number of people who vote by party irrespective of how treasonous their candidates are.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I think that's why Thom is using that word, although I can see your point. And since Nixon's treason was never exposed at the time he was elected after having committed treason.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)The people knew the administration was selling weapons to terrorists to fund an illegal, mercenary army!