Do we have proof of fraud from the 2004 election (2002, 2000)?

[shance]

Do we have the concrete evidence and/or what are we missing in order to have all the ingredients to prove the case that fraud did occur.

[merh]

1. I will say prayers that you receive better treatment than I did

when I posted a similar thread. :hi: Good luck & peace!

[Vincardog]

2. Exit Polls are valid every where else but not here

[New Earth]

4. it's not concrete evidence though

i'm not putting them down in any way,but obviously in *this* country, exit polls mean nothing :eyes:

[New Earth]

3. from what i've learned

the proof would be found in the tabulator software, which seems very hard to get at....especially being that those in power in the respective states stonewall every attempt to get this data....

blah blah same old same old.

[AmerDem]

5. you can start by

reading John Conyers's report on irregularities in Ohio. I think it holds most of what you asked for.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/010605Y.shtml

You can then contact Chairman Sensenbrenner of the House Judiciary Committee asking him to allow federal investigations and hearings based on the report.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x302209

[pgh_dem]

7. Right on

I would suggest people stop wondering if 'we have concrete evidence', and follow the advice above.
Read Conyers' report, contact Sensenbrenner to request a federal investigation.
*We* aren't cops. *We* don't have subpoena power, nor do *we* even have an independent press to do an investigation.
"We" are just people following the news, sharing stories about things that just smell corrupt.
Maybe a helpful analogy would be to refer to ourselves as like the "Neighborhood Watch". Nobody expects the Neighborhood Watch to compile forensic evidence, arrest and interrogate suspects, etc.
The Neighborhood Watch just calls the real cops when they see suspicious behavior (gang of kids hanging out in an abandoned building, strangers sneaking through backyards and so on).
I think the situation we're in now is that we've been calling the cops for 4 years, and they just don't come.

[Chi]

6. IMO, I believe so

I believe so.

There are multiple witnesses that went to the FBI about the RNC hired firm throwing away Democratic voter registrations. An action designed to effect the outcome of the election.

There is also the signed original poll tape(s) found in the garbage in Florida, which did not match the reported results.

Then there is also the Triad rep.(s) that instructed the election official in Ohio to take note of the original count, to make sure the recount matched.

The anomaly of votes switching to *, or defaulting to * (all over the country).
Good study of that here..
http://www.votersunite.org/info/SnohomishElectionFraudInvestigation.pdf

Ohio S.o.S. Blackwell ordering all the provisional ballots (that didn't have birth dates listed) to be thrown away.
Even though the instructions on the ballots said it was not necessary.

Statistical evidence up the wazoo.

Thats just off the top of my head.

P.S. If anyone See's anything I posted is incorrect, please say so.

[troubleinwinter]

8. Read the report as suggested by AmerDem, and also read

this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=288780

The answer is YES, we have evidence of fraud... enough that Conyers requested a special investigator to be appointed by the Justice Department. "concrete" is a meaningless term.

[qwghlmian]

9. Based on the previous thread on this topic,

you will get a lot of replies of people talking past each other.

First you have to get people to agree on what "proof" means. Then you can judge the evidence that is put forth here by that criteria. If by "proof" you mean "will stand up in the court of law" - then the answer to your question is "doubtful".

[Vincardog]

10. If proof is was the election stolen? The answer is yes.

Until we have open fair elections called for by the constitution we are not bound by any electoral results. It is not our job to prove fraud. It is their job to assure us of the openness and fairness of the election.

[tex-wyo-dem]

11. When asking for "proof" of election fraud...

please consider post #88 by Land Shark in the following thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=288780

The thing that I've had trouble putting my arms around is the vast amount of information that has been posted, digesting and vetting this information, weeding through the unsubstantiated/incorrect/wrong information and then tying this into the overall picture. Information has been coming fast and furious ever since Nov. 2, and I wish I had consolidated much of it in my own personal "library", so to speak.

But the thing to remember when considering all the information is to look at the big picture. I believe there was election fraud in 2004 and that it took on many different forms at many different levels of the process. There are a lot of potential ways to sway the vote totals:

1.) Good old voter suppression -- includes everything from making voter registration forms difficult or confusing to fill out correctly to deceiving voters of correct polling locations to making an abnormally high amount of people fill out provisional ballots to shorting certain precincts of voting machines making people wait for hours to intimidation in polling lines to disqualifying provisional absentee ballots because they're not printed on the right weight of paper....and the list goes on and on...

2.) Malfunctioning e-voting machines and the machines in general -- seems there were a lot of reports of people selecting a candidate or a straight party ticket only to have the other choice chosen...just so happens every report I've seen shows that that happen in favor of Bush only...very curious. And the whole issue of what the software/firmware in these machines could do...Example: it's not inconceivable that machines could have software algorithms that could switch votes based upon a running tally (this is just one of many examples).

3.) General, and very understandable, suspicion of companies that are making e-voting machines due to the confidentiality of the machine designs (hardware and software), the lack of the ability to verify votes (i.e. paper trail) and the fact that they are all owned and/or controlled by Republicans. Security of these machines is also a big ? since no one has been able to review the machines and code outside the companies.

4.) Centralized vote tabulation -- big questions regarding security of these databases since entire elections, especially close ones, could be manipulated or hacked, either locally by an unscrupulous person at the state office level or remotely via modem. As has been pointed out on this forum, it would only take about 12 votes/precinct shift to account for the "official" difference between ** and Kerry in Ohio...hardly noticable.

5.) Optiscan and puchcard tabulators -- same issues with confidential software/firmware/hardware and security of these systems.

6.) Outright blocking of vote recount and auditing efforts, first in FL in 2000 and then in OH in 2004, by the powers that be. Why? Because they're hiding something? Just demonstrates how transparency in our election system is only a myth.

And the list goes on and on...

edit: spelling