Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Connell widow says considered restraining order for RS blogger

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 06:50 PM
Original message
Connell widow says considered restraining order for RS blogger
Or so she tells the Cleveland Scene

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/15/90/point-of-impact

After her husband was named as a witness in Arnebeck's lawsuit, Heather Connell was hounded by self-styled online journalists. Some sent threatening postcards. One, a reporter for the website Raw Story, handed Mike's daughter a slip of paper asking Heather to meet her in a nearby park. The cloak-and-dagger approach frightened Heather so much that Connell called his lawyers and had them prepare a restraining order. Until she spoke to Scene last week, Heather had taken to siccing her dogs on anyone who approached her front door. She spends a lot of time in her husband's basement office these days, chain-smoking thin cigarettes and drinking Diet Coke.

Also in the article......

Mike never intended to testify against Rove, says Westover, because he had nothing to say. "He thought the lawsuit was utter bullshit. He was caught in the middle. He just shrugged his shoulders and said, 'That's the dirty business of Washington politics.'"

None of Mike's closest friends remember him ever saying he felt threatened or that his plane might be sabotaged. The only time he canceled a flight was when he turned back to Akron when an engine made noises over Pittsburgh earlier this year. He had the engine serviced by local repairmen.

Also........

"I picked up parts of his body from the lawn where the plane crashed. I have them in a box upstairs. That's how concerned the police and coroner were in investigating it as a suspicious death.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Tangerine LaBamba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Strange story
It's odd, the fuss Arnebeck was making, trying to get protection from someone who was clearly going to be a hostile witness. Seems like that act - because the lawyer alleged that Connell was in danger it was somehow more valid - wanted to be treated as fact.

Sounds like Connell was a very good man, doing the best he could. Without evidence from another source, the allegations are going to fail. That sucks, since I, too, believe that the fix was in. But I don't think there's going to be anything probative coming out of this area of investigation.

The weirdest part of this whole story is his widow's allegations that she has her late husband's body parts in a box upstairs. Then there is reference to his ashes. So, she keeps those body parts in a box - not refrigerated? They've got to be really ripe by now.

As for those "online journalists," that's been a special area of interest of mine for a long time. People with computers and internet access suddenly fashion themselves "journalists" with no training and no credentials. The daughter's ordeal is really awful.

Strange story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. On the body parts
I remember reading that Connell's body was intact. This is strange.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tangerine LaBamba Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Indeed
If there were any "parts," they'd have been unidentifiable.

To me, the wife sounds a bit nuts, but, given what she's going through, it doesn't surprise me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. yes...
because the coroner, both fire chiefs, the funeral home, and one of the state troopers all said so... and let us see the incident report (the troopers did)... according to all of these people, all on the record:

1. Connell was not burned and was found away from the plane
2. He had to be identified by his firngerprints because his face was so badly hurt
3. He, his laptop, a rosary, and some religious literature were all found away from the plane and were all handed over to the family (after going through chain of custody)


Not a single one of them described him in pieces. So this is very strange
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emlev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #1
14. body parts, ashes
Good points. Reading the article, I also wondered why, if Heather Connell had some of her husband's body parts, she would not have given them to the crematorium to put with the rest of his body for cremation.

And we're to believe that when her husband had just been killed in a plane crash, she picked up some of his body parts from the scene and took them home with her?

I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Interesting that the OP doesn't quote anything from the first half of the article.
Examples of what the OP doesn't quote: (BOLDFACE and UNDERLINE emphasis added)

"In 1988, Mike designed databases for George H.W. Bush's presidential campaign. Two years later, he was fired from his job as director of voter programs for former Indiana Senator Dan Coats for participating in a push poll, a survey that uses loaded questions to smear a candidate (such as when South Carolina voters were asked in 2000 whether they'd still support John McCain for president if they were told he'd fathered an illegitimate black child)....

(SNIP)

(After doing tech work for serious rightwingers/fascists Jeb Bush and John Boehner) "Connell then started a new, nonpartisan company, GovTech, to build governmental websites. Heather Connell was the major shareholder in GovTech, allowing it to be certified as a female-owned business for federal contracts, though she had little to do with day-to-day operations. GovTech designed websites for the White House, the Department of Energy and the House Judiciary Committee."

"In 2004, Blackwell awarded GovTech the contract to run the secretary of state's voting results website on election night. Connell built a network that would receive vote tallies from all the tabulating machines in Ohio's 88 counties and post them online in near real time.

"But the system was not secure, according to documents released by the secretary of state's office. And late that night, as it became clear that Ohio would decide the election, some of the data coming in from the tabulators was routed to a private server in Chattanooga, Tennessee. That private server was owned by a company called Smartech (which also stored some of the White House e-mails that later disappeared). At the same time, something strange happened in Southwest Ohio. Even though the Edison-Mitofsky exit polls had shown Kerry leading Bush, the returns from that area of the state suddenly began to favor Bush."

(SNIP)

"'Michael Connell's business was involved in every aspect of this complex conspiracy,' says Arnebeck. 'In Florida (in 2000), they used Connell's micro-targeting system to find the names of felons in neighboring states and then used those names to kick people with similar names off voter registries in Florida.'"

http://www.freetimes.com/stories/15/90/point-of-impact

---------------

There is more. I urge DUers to read the whole article, from the top.

The lower half of the article reveals that Mike Connell was a devout--and, really, to me, it seems--a fanatical Catholic. His wife Heather can't imagine him doing anything illegal or dishonest--but she says something that I find rather odd (probably she doesn't)...

"Heather shakes her head and lights another cigarette. 'Even if you wanted him to do something dishonest, he wouldn't do it,' she says. 'If Joe Mob wanted a website, he wouldn't do it. It wasn't all about the money. That's how he got on top.'"

Doesn't this woman realize that her husband was working for the biggest mob bosses of them all--the Bush Crime Family?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. I didn't post the first half of the article because
there is nothing new there. There's nothing that hasn't been posted on DU dozens of times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wiley50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. You didn't post the top half because you have an axe to grind
as anyone who does a search of your past posts can readily see.

and as most any dedicated poster in DU's Election Reform group knows from experience with you..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. yep...
there is no proof that anyone filed or wanted to file a restraining order against me or that Heather Connell said so even. just this guy making these claims in an article where he does not get the facts straight to begin with, appears to omit key issues ...

like, if Heather was sooooooo afraid of me (having never met me before or talked to me) then why did she go to the park alone to meet me and sit and talk with me for well over an hour? and then went home and discussed filing a restraining order? does that sound believable to anyone?

he claims i met their daughter. i never met her. never even saw her. where did he get this from?

he claims people were sending postcards and threats... fine, produce one of these postcards

he makes references to me, but does not name me? why?

does none of this strike anyone as remotely strange?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. yep...
there is no proof that anyone filed or wanted to file a restraining order against me or that Heather Connell said so even. just this guy making these claims in an article where he does not get the facts straight to begin with, appears to omit key issues ...

like, if Heather was sooooooo afraid of me (having never met me before or talked to me) then why did she go to the park alone to meet me and sit and talk with me for well over an hour? and then went home and discussed filing a restraining order? does that sound believable to anyone?

he claims i met their daughter. i never met her. never even saw her. where did he get this from?

he claims people were sending postcards and threats... fine, produce one of these postcards

he makes references to me, but does not name me? why?

does none of this strike anyone as remotely strange?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonAnn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. He was a very conservative Catholic. Used to authoritarianism, liked serving the
hierarchy, bought into the concept of the end justifies the means, lived the "cult-like" thinking of these people.

I know too many of them and they're really scary. They're like Robert Hanssen of the FBI who was caught spying for the Russians and convicted. Good conservative Catholics. Unquestioning.

The ones I know would do anything they want to do and justify it somehow. If they disagree with a thought, a position, or a person then they must destroy it. They simply cannot accept that there may be more than one point of view, especially anything different from their point of view.

So, religious as he may have been, I could very easily believe that he knowingly participated in vote switching and other election fraud. He would've seen those as "righteous actions" that had to perform to get the "right" result.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 09:14 PM
Response to Original message
8. funny that you should post this...
We all know why you posted this particular part of the article.

But, Renner made loads of mistakes, in particular with regard to me. He never talked to me and got much wrong about what happened with Heather Connell, including me meeting her daughter. Never happened. His editors have already been contacted by my editor. I find it remarkable that he does not name me, but makes claims he cannot support and refers to me rather obviously. We have asked for him to correct his many errors. But I knew you would have this up in no time, and just this part too.

Don't you find it strange that a reporter did not seek comment from the person he is alleging things about? Or that he alludes to the reporter, even though he knows who the reporter is? Or that he leaves out entirely that Heather Connell met me of her own volition in a park - a stranger she did not know at all? Or that he adds a little thing called "self styled?"

Sounds to me like the guy has an axe to grind. Because if he really wanted to give the impression that Heather was indeed frightened of me, it would make sense that he omits that she met with me, alone, in a park for a good hour. He knows this, but left this out. When my editor asked him why he left this out, his response was "this is why I don't talk to online reporters." Strange don't you think?

The point is, not so much that this guy got it wrong, but that you were so eager to post only that part of it in your non-stop attacks on me... which others have made rather obvious already in this thread.

But I guess this sort of blows your earlier argument out of the water... that I had never met the Connell family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Obviously, Connell was just a good god-fearing citizen
laboring in the service of his country.

lol

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-21-09 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
12. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
15. Bottom Line
John Kerry was 4.5 points up on bush until Michael Connell shipped
the vote data to Chattanooga, TN @ midnight and then by 2 AM 11/3/04
bush was 2.1 points up .... a 6.6 point vote swing long after the polls has closed

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. I have known Cliff Arnebeck for years and will vouch that he is a man of the highest integrity.
I've had him and his wife Sibley over to my home numerous times and have worked at his office on a regular basis during the election investigation. Cliff is a truly honest individual whom I have the utmost respect.

I will stand behind his story before any person that would associate himself with the bushies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. O RLY?
Edited on Thu Jan-22-09 04:49 PM by OnTheOtherHand
On what network, result feed, and/or planet was Kerry 4.5 points up on Bush in Ohio at midnight?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. bush won Ohio by 2.2 points
At 12:20 am on the night of the 2004 election exit polls and initial vote counts showed John Kerry the clear winner of Ohio's presidential campaign.
The Buckeye State's 20 electoral votes would have given Kerry the presidency.

But from then until around 2am, the flow of information mysteriously ceased. After that, the vote count shifted dramatically to George W. Bush,
ultimately giving him a second term. In the end there was a 6.7 percent diversion---in Bush's favor---between highly professional, nationally funded
exit polls and the final official vote count as tabulated by Blackwell and Connell.

http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3320

BTW Ohio 2004

more dems than reps. were registered
350,000 new dems registered
35,000 new republican were registered
Ohio lost more jobs from 2000 to 2004 than any state in the country (and voting behavior is a function of economic well being .... #1 factor)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. what "initial vote counts" showed that at 12:20 am?
I call bullshit. I trust Fitrakis's version of the facts no further than he can marshal evidence to support it.

I was watching on CNN (I think), and intermittently checking vote counts on the state web site, and I don't remember Kerry being ahead in the Ohio vote counts at any time I checked. I've read some of the network transcripts, and so far I can't find any hint that Kerry was ahead in the Ohio vote counts. (He might have been in the very first numbers, which the anchors generally wouldn't bother to report on.) Not only that, but I don't know anyone who reminisces about how Kerry was ahead in the Ohio vote count; I don't remember or know of any blog threads about Kerry being ahead in the Ohio vote count, never mind any MSM coverage (unlike extensive MSM mention of Kerry having led in exit polls).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. CNN Ohio exit poll
this is from memory so it might be just a little off

@ 1:07 AM 11/3/04

Female voters 52 to 47.9% Kerry
Male voters 49 to 47.5% Kerry

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. I ask my question again: what VOTE COUNTS
showed Kerry ahead at 12:20 am? I would even settle for vote counts that showed Kerry ahead at 7:35 pm -- at least it would be an interesting point of information.

Exit polls are not vote counts. Fitrakis and Wasserman explicitly referred to both. There is a huge difference between changing exit poll tabulations and changing vote counts. Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 07:26 AM
Response to Original message
17. Sounds like Heather got a wicked bad case of Homelanderism
...assuming, of course, that this 'article' has any cred.

Diet coke and 'thin cigarettes' will not cure her of Homelanderism...fer sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. well, she does smoke
i know that and she did with me (because i do)... but i never focused on the cigs long enough to recall if they were thick or thin. i am very mouch doubting that she told him this stuff, because it is wrong on so many levels and there is evidence that disproves his various claims... like the fact that during our meeting in the park for around an hour, at which time Heather was not scared but for one time... something happened at the park that freaked both of us out. suddenly the cops arrived at this park where no one came to from the looks of it. we were the only ones there. i did not see swings even. and the cops show up all of a sudden, several cars and with sirens. and we looked at each other like WTF is going on? so she asked one of the cops and i asked another why they were there and they said they had gotten a call about a bomb threat relating to a truck that was sitting not 5 feet from us - it was there when I got there, however, so why it suddenly became a threat or who called the threat in is unclear. but we both freaked out for a good five min... she was scared, but not of me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-22-09 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
20. So, how many people are involved in this hit piece? And why help them out here on DU?
Edited on Thu Jan-22-09 11:43 PM by L. Coyote
Not to mention, why would you do this to the Con nell family?
You know there are children involved. Are you making sure they find interesting reading online??

And how many more forums did you post this in?

The typo above decreases the possibilty the children have to read this!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #20
26. I'm not sure its a hit piece
The author went through what Arnebeck said without much checking. The parts about Mrs. Connell are buried at the bottom. Most of what Mrs. Connell said didn't have anything to do with Larisa.

I don't see this as an us against them matter. I want to arrive at the truth. Putting both sides out there increases the chances the truth will come out.

There are over 80 Google pages of stories about the Connell conspiracy theory. There are only a few trying to debunk it. Since the family is angry and says its not true, I think a debunker is something they might like to read.

I posted this thread twice. Once in General Discussion for a wider audience. Once in Election Reform so it would stay up for awhile and ideas would be explored more in depth. I'm very surprised the General Discussion thread has new responses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lala_rawraw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. i posted this in your other thread...
i debunked the Channel 19 story about sabotage... you did not link to that, did not even post it once - for all of your interest in both this story and debunking the conspiracy theories... you did not post it once, let alone twice.

then you take this article and leave out everything but the part relating to me, slap on your own title and throw it up not once, but twice... why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
23. This is like the third time you've been pushing this hit parade in three days
WTF? Were you born stoopud or did you have to go to school?

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-23-09 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
28. Discussion continued....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 22nd 2014, 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC