Speaking of Questions No One Will Answer...

[IndyOp]

Glitch and I asked questions over on another thread and nobody is answering...

From glitch: But when did Votetrustusa activists smear Palast's investigative reporting? That link is still needed to complete this report. Palast wouldn't be at risk by providing that, since it's reporting on something they did to him. Isn't that right?

"I don't mind debating with ChoicePoint (which they refuse to do); but I'll be damned if I will tolerate smears from one of their paid hand puppets smearing my investigative reports while wearing the purloined mantle of voter protection. VoteTrustUSA has violated the public's trust."

From me: Greg, Shark, Anyone: WHEN did VoteTrustUSA's executive immediately run "to the defense of ChoicePoint's ill-making role in wrongly purging African-Americans from Florida Voter rolls"? I looked at the Atlanta Progressive article and I've click on a whole bunch of links to other DU threads and I don't see the evidence.

It is perfectly fair to ask whether Curling's donation to VoteTrustUSA influenced VTUSA actions.

It is NOT fair to say that a VTUSA 'executive' defended ChoicePoint's role in the felon purges without an exact quote. I don't see that you have provided that and I've been clicking links and reading for quite a while now.

:shrug:

As for me, I am very concerned about Choicepoint's recent involvement in getting Mexico's voter rolls to the FBI.

I believe that VTUSA should release a public statement that lays to rest any/all concerns that Donna Curling/Choicepoint has in anyway influenced VTUSA's opinions and actions. Would that be sufficient for VTUSA to clear their good name?

[donsu]

1. I keep asking about voter fraud/rigging and DU remains silent

but they talk endlessly about who is running, who will win, as if the voting isn't rigged.

bizarre

[Boredtodeath]

3. I'll be happy to answer questions

But, the first and least spoken issue is about Ballot Definition Files. Here's what I mean.

Even IF your state doesn't allow straight party voting, these machines provide that capability and cannot turn it off.

So, if I were to design a ballot, for instance, which made the Coroner's race the controlling race, and only a republican was running, then I could change all the upticket races to republican votes. All I have to do is make the Coroner's race the straight party controlling vote.

Remember all the reports about Kerry votes which became Bush votes? THIS is how it happened. And, no matter how many times you changed it to Kerry, if you didn't change the Coroner's vote, it was stored as a Bush vote.

[IndyOp]

5. Are you serious? DU silent on election fraud/rigging?

We all experience DU differently, but the Election Reform Forum is virtually all election fraud/rigging all the time.

Here are the relevant entries from my Journal:

Democracy Crisis: A Briefing for Democrats - Will All Votes Count?
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/IndyOp/28

Inhibiting Election Fraud in 2006: Simple. Not easy. Very, very important.

The problem is NOT voting machines. There is an ELEPHANT in the room

Courageous Schakowsky (D-IL): WAS 2004 ELECTION STOLEN? "ONLY ANSWER YES"

Votergate - Video of SD pollworker told to take voting machines home!!

Here is the blow-by-blow for memory card hack in 2000...

Memory card used to subtract 16,000 votes from Gore in FLA 2000 -

The Hursti hack of Ion Sancho's machines is what you need to show him...

Parallel elections...

A plea for help from PFAW. Worried - TERRIFIED is a better word -

[MelissaB]

2. It appears we share the same concerns. I'd like this addressed, too.

[OnTheOtherHand]

4. as for VTUSA statements

here's a pretty forceful one from Joan Krawitz:

For the record, Donna Curling is not on the board of VTUSA, as Paul Lehto knows full well. We don't have board members. She certainly does not influence (or attempt to influence) anything we do. The leaders of VoteTrustUSA are Warren Stewart, John Gideon, Susan Greenhalgh and me. We have all worked tirelessly for state and federal legislation, regulation and litigation to get rid of paperless electronic voting machines and to mandate Voter Verified Paper Ballots and audits. That's all we do and we have all virtually given up our lives and livelihoods to do so. John and I have given the issue our all for more than three years. Warren and Susan have done so for nearly two years. We are very proud of the work we do and the fact that we have done so with miniscule funding. Last year our total contributions were well under $50,000, and only a fraction of that came from Donna, who hasn't donated anything to VTUSA since last winter. We're in this to try to save democracy and we damn well wouldn't do the bidding of any company or person for any amount of money -- as those who know us at all are very aware.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1643855&mesg_id=1644312

[IndyOp]

6. I've PM'ed Joan my support and my questions and suggestion

about a press release. Palast's report about Choicepoint involvement in procuring Mexico's voter rolls (exerpt below) is very, very troubling.

The Atlanta Progress article about the association between Donna Curling and VTUSA is, to me, mildly concerning. Appearances matter. I think it is in VTUSA's best interest to make a public simple, succinct statement that Curling did *not* influence VTUSA's opinions or actions. The first sentence of the last paragraph of Palast's email to LandShark says, "Mrs. Curling's money MAY NOT influence VoteTrustUSA." VTUSA, I think, should come out and say it.

I am still waiting for the answers to the questions in my OP. Maybe they have to come from Palast and he is a little busy right now. Until Greg answers I think we should chill out.

STEALING MEXICO

It begins with an FBI document marked, “Counterterrorism” and “Foreign Intelligence Collection” and “Secret.” Date: “9/17/2001,” six days after the attack on the World Trade towers. It’s nice to know the feds got right on the ball, if a little late.

<snip>

When we received the document, we obtained as well its classified appendix. The target nations for “foreign counterterrorism investigation” were nowhere near the Persian Gulf. Every one was in Latin America — Argentina, Venezuela, Mexico and a handful of others.

<snip>

All the target nations had one thing in common besides a lack of terrorists: each had a left-leaning presidential candidate or a left-leaning president in office. In Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez, bete noir of the Bush Administration, was facing a recall vote. In Mexico, the anti-Bush Mayor of Mexico City, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was (and is) leading the race for the Presidency.

Most provocative is the contractor to whom this no-bid contract was handed: ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta, Georgia. ChoicePoint is the database company that created a list for Governor Jeb Bush of Florida of voters to scrub from voter rolls before the 2000 election. ChoicePoint’s list (94,000 names in all) contained few felons. Most of those on the list were guilty of no crime except Voting While Black. The disenfranchisement of these voters cost Al Gore the presidency.

Having chosen our President for us, our President’s men chose ChoicePoint for this sweet War on Terror database gathering. The use of the Venezuela’s and Mexico’s voter registry files to fight terror is not visible — but the use of the lists to manipulate elections is as obvious as the make-up on Katherine Harris’ cheeks.

[Land Shark]

19. every time a forceful statement comes out, it's easy to respond

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1643855&mesg_id=1649006>

Well, here's one example of calling Palast out for intentionally "lying" in his work and not being willing to admit that linked to at the top of this reply. That charge made against Palast certainly constitutes criticizing his work, and a director of vtusa wrote it (whether or not he had a official director hat on at the time). But we hear again and again that "We" at VTUSA have not criticized Palast, etc. etc.,

just read the link above.

The really unfortunate thing is the categorical denials that really constitute a form of coverup. WHy not just say you're sorry to Palast? Or, that you're not sorry?

[Kurovski]

7. here's what the AP article reported:

"Meanwhile, Greg Palast threatened Atlanta Progressive News with a slander lawsuit if we were to reprint off-the-record comments made by some local and national voting rights activists which may have criticized Palast’s work."

--so Palast clearly doesn't want the comments out there, but claims they were critical of him, and that they exist.

"Atlanta Progressive News has contacted a number of local and national voting rights and voting integrity activists, and was surprised to see how many were actually engaging in the practice of defending Choicepoint. Several respondents were granted off-the-record interviews.

John Gideon of VoteTrustUSA said he had “no comment,” when asked about the Curlings’ support of the organization or others, or of Scott Holcomb’s campaign."

--AP seems to verify the defense of Choicepoint by activists, but says the comments are off the record, except for VTUSA which says "no comment."

--WTF. It's all a matter of "whom do you believe?"

I will say, I don't buy into this defense of Choicepoint:

"Some of those who defended Choicepoint said it wasn’t Choicepoint that was responsible for the 2000 disenfranchisement in Florida; instead, it was the company they acquired and profited from."

--Choicepoint's actions may be legal, but I find them immoral. helping the government skirt around the Constitution is more than I can handle.

VTUSA can handle this fast by severing ties.

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0069.html

[Boredtodeath]

8. Greg Palast leaves out FACTS

From the NAACP lawsuit:
ChoicePoint acquired DBT in May, 2000, after the initial 2000 voter exception list was delivered to Florida officials for verification.

[Wilms]

9. Hey, hey. Why are you defending ChiocePoint.

:sarcasm:

Be careful, BTD. If you post a fact which contradicts an erroneous statement, you'll will not be branded an advocate for truth and accuracy. Rather, you'll be labeled a defender of bad people.

I think it's a mob psychology thing.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wilms]

11. OK, so we're a bit short on critical thinking around here.

(Nothing new, actually.)

But the grammer and punctuation have been reasonable. That's how I know I didn't click Freeperville.

LOL

[IndyOp]

12. I suspected right away that BH is an element in this mess... (n/t)

[MelissaB]

13. I want to know if she and Landshark are working together. It would help

answer a lot of questions in my mind. This is one question I didn't want to ask, but now need to know. If she is a player it explains a heck of a lot.

I'm tired of dancing around the issue. Is she or isn't she involved?

[Wilms]

14. Of course "she" is involved.

If judging by the quotes in that APN story.

Does that mean LandShark is "involved" with Bev? Of course not.

But sure. You could ask if he is.

[MelissaB]

16. I'm asking, and I'll apologize up front to LS if he is offended.

I want to know if/how Bev is involved. I believe he linked to a quote on her site. I want to know if they are "involved" in any way.

Landshark, several people are wondering and this would answer many questions.

[OnTheOtherHand]

17. here you go, in case he isn't logged on or monitoring

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=440200&mesg_id=440371

"43. Nah, the Bev Harris angle is a canard, I've not even spoken with her

or her organization about this issue, although I did take a phone call interview from her organization regarding legal work I'm doing for non-BBV Kentuckians in Kentucky."

I have no reason to doubt that -- any more than I have any reason to doubt Joan Krawitz's unequivocal denials of the accusations that have been fomented against her organization. Actually, I would not go to the mat vouching for Land Shark's accuracy after this

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=433477&mesg_id=434518
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=433477&mesg_id=434613

or a few other things that I could point to, but I think it has something to do with how he perceives reality.

[OnTheOtherHand]

15. I'm not sure it matters much

Land Shark wrote somewhere that he hasn't spoken with her about this issue (well, you might check the exact words -- he is a lawyer, after all). I think he is capable of grinding his own axes. I also think it's time for him to stop.

As for how Greg Palast got this idea that VTUSA is trashing him, could Bev be a player in that? You tell me. I certainly won't rule it out. But there are all sorts of ways that people can get distorted ideas of who is saying what about them.

[Cookie wookie]

18. On rethinking, I'm deleting this post.

If anyone started to reply to it, I apologize. I do know more about this, but we've had enough of a firestorm and some of what I said was speculation.

[troubleinwinter]

23. Common Denominator:

They both oppose Holt 550.

They both seem hell-bent on smearing VTUSA.

[Land Shark]

20. Here's a general synopsis of how this went down from my perspective

(1) although i'd written a tiny bit on choicepoint before, the atlanta progressive article comes out of the blue for me, along with a mod mom thread.
(2) that atlanta progressive article already contains Palast threatening litigation because he's being smeared (or whatever the exact quote is, check the article)
(3) I'm still not doing anything, but then later i start a thread
(4) out of the blue, greg palast writes to me and says it's ok to post it, so i do. This is the first email i've received from Greg palast, i sent a couple a long time before that I never got a response to since i'm sure he's busy. I was very surprised to receive it.
(5) in retrospect it now seems that people figured I'd solicited a post from Palast, which i did not. Some folks also saw the "hand of bev" which I denied as a "canard"
(6) I've since received lots of pms and lots of emails from lots of folks, including but not limited to an email from Kathleen Wynne, one from Bev Harris, and another from Greg Palast (short). Also from a bunch of other people you might know of but none of them are important or the 'puppetmasters' here.

What we have is Greg Palast is very upset with statements by activists against his work that he says constitute smearing.

I don't and didn't have any involvement in making that charge, suggesting it, etc. but I can see from my own experience that there is reason for concern. There's smearing going on as to me as well (of course, the smearers as always will just say that I brought this 'upon myself')

IMPORTANT NOTE:
All of these threads are misleading and unfair to the extent they ignore the fact that numerous posters are complaining about violations of alleged vtusa email confidentiality and still others are demanding that the debate stop, both of which would advocate a "no post" posture, as would a regard for not inflaming the situation further. But, at the VERY same time still others insist that evidence all be posted and that this continue on indefinitely because these posters really really really want to know the facts that Palast is complaining about, etc. This would suggest a "post freely" posture. The two are very much at odds with each other. Regardless of whether intentional or not, there's in effect a trap whereby one is eitehr accused of having/posting "no evidence" or else one is accused of violation of alleged confidentiality rules.

[MelissaB]

21. This synopsis is helpful,

but I'd still like to know why you think it's somebody from VoteTrust doing the smearing that Greg Palast is upset about.

[Land Shark]

25. with one exception, vtusa people are the only ones i've ever heard

do these kinds of things.

But it's time for a change of pace, for two reasons. One is important work coming up on Wed in DC for VTUSA such that this should probably go on the back burner. The other reason is that I have good reason to suspect that Joan Krawitz, for example, was caught not knowing about the statement made on the BBV bulletin board that I've linked to.

Since VTUSA has got some important DC work this wednesday, I'm willing to give this a hiatus if other people will comply. That's simply to allow vtusa 48 hours of concentration before the important work on Wed. Then, this subject can be picked up later on since it too is important.

on edit: melissaB i undersand your curiousity, but to the extent this debate is "damaging" which many feel it is, hauling in more names and quotes only makes it worse. Those that want to fan the flames or incite something will keep on pushing for more. Remember, the man here is palast, he's the one who's saying he got smeared, he hasn't shared those specifics with me, and if I post more of my own information it only makes the fire worse, and it doesn't necessarily get us at ALL to the real issue, which involves Palast, not me.

[OnTheOtherHand]

22. "the smearers as always will just say that I brought this 'upon myself')"

Paul, I am laughing at you now. It's a nice change of mood.

[Land Shark]

24. Glad you are so happy playing with your fingerpaints, OTOH

It's good to get a laugh every now and then.

[OnTheOtherHand]

26. I will wear your stripes with honor. n/t

[BeFree]

27. Here's a question

To all the Vote.orgs:

Can you please make public your financial statements?

Can you tell us where your money comes from and where it goes, with a fair amount of detail?

These type of questions have already been asked of a couple of vote groups. Well, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I look forward to the individuals who have been pressing for disclosures from other groups to give this post a big K&R.

[troubleinwinter]

28. Nice idea.

Actually, I have found that most of them with a history are already on Guidestar.

Better to submit a formal request directly to the organization itself, as I did, as per law, rather than posting it here to have any weight at all. I can't say that even submitting a formal request will get a complete legal compliance, though.

I requested BlackBoxVoting's 990 on April 3. They didn't file until 5/15, and they had 30 days to mail it. They mailed a part of it. Awhile later (after legal compliance due date), they emailed a little bit more. As of today, they have not fully complied with the request. The IRS may impose fines/fees for such delinquencies. I guess BBV may not care much if donated funds are spent on fines. Apparently they are not concerned about donor funds being used for IRS penalties for not depositing payroll taxes for a year, either.

Seemingly BBV does not wish to provide (as required) a '990 Schedule B' disclosing the large donations they accepted as indicated on their Schedule A, apparently a $30,000 and a $20,000. While donor identity is not required, they don't seem to even want to publicly acknowledge these donations? Let alone "make public" the sources.

I do agree, that orgs should make the info available, in accordance with law (orgs need not comply until certain dates....example, BBV fiscal went from July 2004-June 2005, and final legal date for them to send their 990 was June 2006).

You can go to the IRS site and read.

What is truly frustrating is when an organization does not fully comply with a legal request. But, it is not in my hands.

When an organization is granted tax exemption, there are certain legal obligations that are required to be abided by. But that is now in the hands of the IRS.