Lawsuit filed against Diebold for fraud; proceeds may fund BlackBoxVoting

[BevHarris]

BLACK BOX VOTING LAUNCHES FIRST PUBLICLY FUNDED CONSUMER PROTECTION ORGANIZATION FOR ELECTIONS

California lawsuit unsealed seeking restitution from Diebold for fraud - may fund Black Box Voting organization

There are no other groups fulfilling the role of consumer investigation in elections.

Trust in our voting system is the element that keeps us from taking to the streets every time we disagree with something our government does. Perceived lack of integrity in the voting system can cause a whole country to quit cooperating, or lose interest in voting. It is only because our representatives were chosen by our own voice that we agree to abide by the laws they vote upon, on our behalf.

Black Box Voting, a new, nonpartisan, publically funded organization, was founded by investigative writer Bev Harris, who began investigations into election procedures in 2002, uncovering story after story with journalistic integrity by providing solid documentation for her discoveries. (14 stories broken by Harris: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bev-harris.htm)

Private donations provided start-up funds for Black Box Voting. Potential funding may come from a lawsuit filed against Diebold Election Systems in California. Unsealed on July 9, 2004, it will, if successful, provide additional funding for the organization.

"Qui Tam" is a term for a whistleblower suit seeking to recover government funds spent based on fraudulent claims. The Qui Tam suit filed by Bev Harris and Jim March seeks to recover funds for the state of California from Diebold Election Systems. As part of the Qui Tam action, a bounty for the whistleblowers is paid, and Diebold will be asked to pay this to Harris and March as part of additional damages, which in turn will help fund Black Box Voting.

This case was originally filed back in November of 2003, and the existence of the case was held under seal by the courts while various government attorneys decided whether or not to "join in the case". When it became clear that the seal would still be intact through the California primaries (March 2nd), Harris, March and attorney Finley "split out" elements of the case that could be made public immediately in an attempt to improve the security of the primaries. That attempt via preliminary injunction failed, although those weaker case elements are still in play, but now the other shoe has dropped: the much stronger "financial fraud-based" elements of the case are now public.

The state and county attorneys are still officially undecided as to whether to join in or not. Should they do so, the plaintiffs and their attorney will split a 15% "bounty" on all funds
recovered -- should Harris and March have to prosecute the entire matter without government legal assistance, the state and county will still get their money back but the "bounty" jumps to 30%.

Note that when fraud can be proven in a Qui Tam action under California state law, damages are subject to triple damage penalties. In Alameda County alone, this would cost Deibold $42 million, which would go towards restitution to the taxpayer.

As a result of this Qui Tam action, ALL California counties attempting to use Diebold's equipment (including optical scans) now have the option of joining in the Qui Tam action and recieving up to triple their costs for the fraud committed against them. Taxpayers in any county trying to remain with Diebold while this option is now publicly on the table should be asking harsh questions of their local officials.

Harris has been opposed using Qui Tam suits in most cases for fraudulent claims against voting machines because Qui Tam generally requires keeping evidence secret from the public, under seal. The case against voting machines is time sensitive and evidence is critical to the public interest Harris and March attorney, Lowell Finley, found legal precedent in California showing that in cases of overriding public interst, Qui Tam succeeds without withholding information from the public.

Both Harris and March insisted on and have continued activism for clean voting during the sealed phase of this particular case, bringing to light critically important information including locating and taking declarations from Diebold technician James Dunn, who was instructed by Diebold to install uncertified patches on machines for California and Kansas before the March 2 primary election, and locating criminal documents of convicted felons who had access to the Diebold system.

Harris and March were not inhibited one iota in continuing activism for clean voting or in continuing research on Diebold Harris and March's attorney, Lowell Finley, believes case law supports their position. In cases where a compelling public interest is served, precendence exists for allowing plaintiffs to recover Qui Tam claims without keeping evidence secret. Whether or not Harris and March prevail, the State of California is likely to recover funds spent on Diebold equipment as a result of fraudulent claims, claims in large part investigated and proven by Harris and March.

If Harris and March prevail, they will apply a significant portion of the settlement to fund the Black Box Voting consumer protection group for elections Black Box Voting is the only organization focused on investigating local election procedure to find out what’s going on and make the public aware of specific problems to improve electoral integrity.

All elections, even national elections, take place at the local level. The Federal Elections Commission consists of six people who set broad national policy guidelines but generally do not investigate specific, local complaints. The newly formed Election Assistance Commission (EAC) publishes policy guidelines and may help set standards but is not staffed or funded for investigation of local problems. The Carter Center monitors elections only in foreign countries.

Black Box Voting investigates elections in the real world, in the field. It has attracted thousands of citizen volunteers who will assist in monitoring elections and catching problems. Two full time staff investigators (Bev Harris and Associate Director Andy Stephenson) visit and interview local election officials, candidates, poll workers, national ITA certifiers, and the programmers who design the software used in today's election systems.

Why do elections need an independent consumer organization?

Election procedures have changed.
- Modern-day voting systems have largely been privatized. Key functions are run by private for-profit corporations. These corporations have a habit of hiring their own regulators.

- “To err is machine” — Voting machines have been found to miscount. Some miscounts are
ridiculous (i.e. Allamakee County Iowa, 2000 national election, counted 4 million votes though just 300 voters showed up to vote). Many miscounts, if they are less obvious, are never flagged at all.

- The certification system for voting machines is so fundamentally flawed that it allows machines to miscount and lose votes. Four studies in a row spotted serious errors that passed through certification without a hitch.

- Voting software has been found to contain hidden “back doors” that allow end runs around the voting system.

- Recent changes in voter registration systems may bring new problems with voter roll accuracy. Outsourced voter roll verification has resulted in wrongfully purged voters

- Ballot production, performed by private companies, can cause certain kinds of votes to be omitted from the count. This applies to optical scan ballots (fill in the dot) and punch card
ballots.

- New systems are designed to replace the poll book sign in with a computerized, digital system made by private companies, using proprietary software that the public is not allowed to examine. Such a system, improperly used, would enable whole cemeteries to sign in and vote.

- Certified and sworn election officials now outsource — even during live elections — to technicians employed by private manufacturers. Private vendors, in turn, outsource election support to temporary employees hired by third parties.

- Redistricting software, also produced by private companies who hold it proprietary, now allows instant and precise data designed to manipulate districts for political gain.

- Election officials are often appointed, not elected. In many states there is no requirement for election officials to disclose personal financial information, inviting conflict of interest.

- Election checks and balances have eroded: Voter Verified Paper ballots have been removed in as many as 20 percent of all voters in the U.S. Paperless touch screen machines do not permit recounts. Even when paper ballots exist, in many states it is now illegal to compare them to computer counts, even in a recount.

- Absentee voting: In most locations, there is no way to know whether all the ballots mailed in were counted. At no point is there a comparison of the count received by the Post Office with the count received by the elections division.

- Polling place results used to be compared with the overall totals, to make sure each polling place result was correctly reported when all votes are added up. This key audit has been eliminated in most locations, opening the door for tampering by replacing memory cards and/or tampering with the central server at the county level.

We have independent consumer protection organizations for toasters. You can read about problems with baby car seats in consumer publications. But until now, no independent, publicly funded consumer protection organization has existed for the most fundamental piece of democracy we have: Elections.

Who runs Black Box Voting?

Board of directors:
- Linda Franz (Washington state), with knowledge of HAVA and pending voting machine legislation;
- Jim March (California), with expertise in lobbying and computer programming. March has been heavily involved in analysis of the Diebold software, and testifies regularly at California
Voting Systems Panel hearings;
- Joseph M. Bailey III (Washington state), founder of an electrical workers union for people of
color
- Thalia Dudley (Washington state), a member of the Dudley family, an African-American family who has fought for the right to vote every generation for five generations;
- Vickie Karp (Texas), who is also chairperson for the Coalition for Visible Ballots, and recently made the news with a billboard campaign about the need for paper ballots
- Agrippa Williams (Washington state), renowned for his work keeping black history alive, and the recipient of many awards for outstanding citizenship (he once gave a kidney to a complete stranger in order to save his life.)

Staff:
- Bev Harris - executive director. An investigative journalist who has been profiled in Vanity Fair, Time Magazine, and has provided stories to most major news outlets in the U.S.
- Andy Stephenson - associate director. Stephenson was one of the original and most productive of the researchers who have worked with Bev Harris. He recently resigned his candidacy for Washington secretary of state and will work on the national level with consumer research and education with Black Box Voting.

Funding

Black Box Voting is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, 501 C-3 organization. Funding comes from private donation, public citizens, nonpartisan house parties, town meetings, and other venues.

Public funding for Black Box Voting is raised through private donors, and public citizens through nonpartisan house parties and town meetings. Harris donated her rights to the “Black Box Voting” book, and its proceeds, to the nonprofit group. All proceeds for the Talion Publishing version of the book were gifted to Black Box Voting, the nonprofit.

[displacedtexan]

1. Major Kudos, Bev!

What can we do to help here in DC/Baltimore?
I've told the UU Social Action Committee about BBV.
It's their no. 1 concern!

[Karenina]

2. Kick!

:kick:

[BevHarris]

21. What you can do in Baltimore

1. Hook up with an excellent group, TrueVoteMD.org, which is leading the activism in Maryland. http://www.truevotemd.org

2. Join the election watch activities of Black Box Voting. We have a variety of ways to become involved, starting with the fall primaries, and hopefully we can use real-world election watching to muscle some last-minute improvements into place by November. Election watch actions range from volunteering as election judges and poll workers to watching the central count to participating in hotlines to helping monitor incoming results to spot anomalies in core audit data.

3. We have uncovered some new information on Maryland problems in our investigation. Stay tuned. When you hear it, use it to agitate immediately for more reforms.

Also check out VotersUnite.org, a very good group with lots of practical actions you can take. http://www.votersunite.org -- download the "Myth Breakers" handout and give it to public officials.

Bev

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[yowzayowzayowza]

8. Schism...

defined?

:kick:

[yowzayowzayowza]

20. Chirp...

Chirp... Chirp....

:kick:

[John_H]

22. Seems like so far Diebold shareholders are making most of the money

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=DBD&a=00&b=31&c=1981&d=06&e=10&f=2004&g=m

Bev used to post a lot on the yahoo DBD board. I never could figure out when it was time to short, though. Damn.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[yowzayowzayowza]

24. Thank you for the clarification.

As always, greatly appreciate your passion and labor. The disjointed efforts of the various voting activism groups can be EXTREMELY difficult for us layfolkz to follow. My meager trust and faith are tough enough to allocate these days, even without sniping twixt the good guys.

[yowzayowzayowza]

28. Case in point, your comrade:

Jim March
Senior Member

Registered: Dec 2002
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4614

I'll be making inquiry re: CCW soon.

On a comical note: go check out the horrendous squabbling over this that's broke out on DU:

http://www.democraticunderground.co...1960084#1961419

A big part: the various "commies" over there are choking over the idea of profit getting wrapped up in activism.

It's genuinely hilarious.

Me?

I'm a gun nut, remember? Call me a "bounty hunter" and I'll say: yup!

Silly commies.

Nuf said.

[BevHarris]

29. Everyone knows that Jim March is right wing

He is a gun lobbyist Libertarian. Black Box Voting is nonpartisan. Jim March is one of the most effective activists in the U.S. on the voting issue, and has the ear of many in the California legislature.

And he's honest.

I think the posts here bear out his point that lefty causes tend to wear lack of funds as a badge of honor, and have a serious problem with turf wars.

Right wing sites call progressives who are upset about getting funding "commies." The point is valid -- I keep seeing people on the progressive side of things launch turf wars, when we are fighting a well organized cause that is funded with literally billions of dollars.

But, when evaluating the turf wars, judge by results. Have the Black Box Voting investigations gotten this issue into the mainstream media? Absolutely. Have our investigations prodded some states to drop flawed voting systems in favor of more secure systems? Yes.

By the way, the story on Ohio is quieter than California, but even more powerful. Out of 31 Ohio counties that bought touch screens, 26 rescinded their contract, due to the brilliant efforts of Ohio senator Teresa Fedor and CASE Ohio. And yes, the Black Box investigations helped, by kicking the legs out from under the 31 lawsuits filed by the National Federation for the Blind (they dropped their lawsuits 24 hours after we got the story about Diebold's $1 million payment to the NFB into the New York Times).

The other area where we've been effective is with educating minority groups in Cleveland. Apparently too effective -- this week, Don King showed up telling everyone that Bush is the great white liberal black folks have been waiting for, and urging Cleveland's black ministers to go after the faith-based cash.

Bev Harris

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[Kelvin Mace]

180. Typical neo-con name-calling...

A big part: the various "commies" over there are choking over the idea of profit getting wrapped up in activism.

It's genuinely hilarious.

Me?

I'm a gun nut, remember? Call me a "bounty hunter" and I'll say: yup!

Silly commies.

This is the person that bbv.org has chosen to get involved with?

The major thrust of anti-BBV rational has been that Diebold et al, are doing this to make money at the expense of the taxpayer. Bev herself exposed the fact that supposedly non-partisan groups (Election Center, NFB, etc) were siding with BBV because voting machines companies were funding them.

The BBV crowd said Bev and I were doing it to sell books. So, we gave the book away on-line. But then, Bev turns around, teams up with Jim March (who proudly crows about expecting it to make him rich) and sets out to line her pockets with money. (Please, none of that nonsense about it going to a non-profit foundation. Three people stand to gain handsomely: Bev Harris, Jim March, and Lowell Findley!)

Jim March is bragging about using the money to further a right-wing agenda loathed by most of us here.

And who are the bad guys? Why we "silly commies" of course.

[Eloriel]

31. On, no, I got it

What "Eloriel" doesn't understand is the following

Oh, I understand perfectly. I can read, and I read the press release thoroughly, including the pre-emptive explanation about her previous position.

Please note that I also said in my VERY first sentence that I hope she becomes a very wealthy woman and/or that her organization profits handsomely. In fact, I said I "sincerely hope" -- and I rarely if ever say what I don't mean. Hey, more power to her. She's worked hard and has sacrificed financially and in other ways -- so why not benefit financially, esp. if it also furthers the cause?

It's just the HYPOCRISY that rankles, including the undeserved, unwarranted, never apologized for false accusations in a public place (DU) which just happened to be levied around the same time as this wonderful new version of a state-level qui tam is getting filed. Oh, but I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

Too, I certainly don't consider undeserved (and never apologized for) false allegations to be acting "honorably," but then I do realize that what some consider "honor" is different than my standards for same.

And if there are one or more qui tam suits working in Georgia, I'm certainly not aware of them since I am NOT involved in this issue in any way, except to occasionally post to threads on the subject. There got to be just one too many betrayals, but that's a different story.

[Andy F]

50. Reconciliation Please

Obviously there was a major misunderstanding here. I'd strongly suggest that arguing among ourselves accomplishes nothing. If more than one person has filed such a suit, can you please consolidate them and work together?

[Kelvin Mace]

218. No one else has filed such

a suit and no one wanted to since it would allow critics to claim you were doing it for the money.

However, people on this board were accused of filing the suits and betraying the cause at the same time they themselves were filing such a suit.

And there you have the crux of our objection.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[Eloriel]

240. How interesting there've been no more responses

from Bev.

She must be really busy elsewhere.

[ParanoidPat]

4. Thanks Bev! Those of us out here in California.....

.....appreciate all of the effort you have put into this over the last year and a half or more. Unlike some others around here who don't seem to appreciate that MOST of the damages (if indeed the suit is won) will go back to the Counties who were ripped off by Diebold. Aren't you glad you went for the 501 C-3? :)

Here's to victory! :toast: :thumbsup: :evilgrin:

[Eloriel]

5. Oh, that's not lost on me at all.

Believe me, Pat, I didn't say anywhere close to ALL of what I was thinking in my post. And a sneer and a slam right back atcha.

Oh, and btw, 501(c)(3) was something else she couldn't be bothered with back in the day. Oh well. :shrug:

[donhakman]

6. Good news and heroic hard work

[ParanoidPat]

10. Sneer and slam?

:shrug: I would never put you or Rox down as I know very well both of your contributions to the BBV efforts. I will be the first to publicly thank you both for your efforts and the work you've done in Georgia. :toast:

I do however think you are being a bit unfair to Bev about the money angle. It sounds to me as if the award (if there should be one) is going to fund the non-profit organization. Whats the worst that could happen? Bev gets a job that pays well and we get fair elections. Sounds like just compensation for her tireless efforts and a 'win/win' situation to me. I truely hope it works out just as well for you two.

And as far as the 501 (c)(3) is concerned, have you ever tried to start one? :)
It takes time and money to do it and at the time, there was little of either to get it done. I'm sure you of all people can understand that.

[AP]

12. The only way private citizens would ever pursue matters like this...

...is if there were the possibility of huge awards. I have no problem with that. That's the logic of qui tam. I completely understand if Bev was paranoid. Even if you didn't believe she was risking her live, she was almost definitely taking a huge financial risk (obviously with the possiblity of great reward, but a risk nonetheless). She was trusting strangers with information that could have a huge difference in where her life was going. It looks like some personalities simply didn't mesh.

Nonetheless, clearly trust and cooperation isn't beyond her capacities -- she's working with Andy. So some people's personalities didn't mesh and resulted in trust being destroyed and hurt feelings. Who couldn't see that coming? 9 out of 10 internet projects end up that way.

I'm just happy that this whole thing is still moving forward against all odds.

[Eloriel]

33. You need to re-read my post

And my subsequent posts, especially, perhaps, the part that I don't usually say things I don't mean. So I'm in NO way being unfair to Bev, nor am I in ANY way against her benefitting personally and professionally from her efforts.

If YOU are gong to accuse me of something, please make sure it's not another false allegation.

[Melinda]

43. I well remember how Bev went after Roxanne.......

I felt at the time that Bev had to have been HUGE amount of stress as the things she accused Roxanne of (looking to profit by filing a qui tam and looking to sabatoge Bev's efforts) were beyond the pale in their sheer unreasonableness.

I repeatedly pleaded with Bev to NOT do that here, and to retract her ugly, ugly words... she was viciously horrible in the things she said, and she HURT many people who had worked very hard in what we all believed at the time to be our common cause. Bev's diatribe resulted in her being banned from DU along with Roxanne - Bev promised to play nice and was subsequently reinstated here, while Roxanne left for good.

Rox went on to work her ass off in GA without seeking compensation or, as she had been accused of by Bev, filing the same Qui Tam that Bev swore up and down she would NEVER file, and that she would never seek compensation.

To say I am shocked at this revelation would be an understatement. All I can and will do at this point is to nod to both Rox and Eloriel - spot on call ladies - and make certain that I distance myself from Ms Harris in the future.

I once trusted you Bev; now I want nothing to do with you.

[Occulus]

141. My understanding of her reasons for being against a Qui Tam at the time

had nothing at all to do with money, but rather the fact that certain pieces of evidence would remain sealed from public view. It's totally acceptable to me that, now that Bev has learned evidence can INDEED be kept public WHILE filing a Qui Tam under certain circumstances, she has now changed her tune on the matter. It's also perfectly understandable to me that she may not have known that before now; God knows *I* don't know much about the legal issues involved in such a suit. I would expect many of us would have various misconceptions regarding that aspect of the situation.

Deep, ongoing stress can do horrible things to a person's use of language; I know that much all too well. She hasn't lost MY trust in any way, because I examined the evidence she uncovered and found her conclusions to be eminently credible.

It was *never* about money. Some people just don't get that part of it. It's about rigged elections; the money generated by a Qui Tam suit is incidental and peripheral to the overall cause.

Oh, and saying something like what you said about someone who has uncovered so much and spent bucketloads of her own cash on the cause, well.... I don't think I need to say anything more on the subject. I *do* think this will be the first and last time I respond to anything you write here; that's your loss.

[JohnLocke]

42. Whoa.

I'm lost. Could someone please explain to me what the relationship BevHarris and you had?

[SharonAnn]

7. Bev, thank you for what you've been doing for all of us. I don't

know if there could have been any other methods to use, I'll just go with your judgement on this.

What you've done for democracy in America can only help us, it certainly hasn't hurt us.

[Oilwellian]

9. A consumer protection group is just what we need

Thanks for stepping up to the plate. Your work is admired by many.

[BevHarris]

25. Thanks. An update on current activities...

Dixie is beautiful... as long as you are sitting in air conditioning.

Down here, they call certain activities "greazin' the palms" -- and apparently this greazin' goes on also in Ohio and on the East Coast, and in California. I expect we'll find greazin' the palms just about everywhere.

Reports so far are that most of it is still done the old fashioned way: cash in envelopes. I was curious about how they account for the cash, because the incoming funds would appear to be very documentable, government checks and such. We have now learned of a very simple, yet effective way to account for the money while building a fat cash slush fund.

The infrastructure for greazin' the palms has been in place for decades -- maybe over a hundred years -- but the advent of computerized voting produced additional opportunities all the way around. We have been surprised by how widespread the infrastructure is.

It isn't just greazin' the palms, though, that has caused this rush to flawed voting machines. These companies have employed some very skillful marketing strategies that, while they could be considered conflict of interest, are probably not illegal.

And it isn't just greazin' the palms and marketing. We've also got a handy old technique called steering the contract: Set the contract up with specific hoops that only one manufacturer can jump through.

In South Carolina -- I am two days late getting this story up on the web site -- two senators have now called for criminal prosecution of the state HAVA board and two separate actions have derailed their attempted purchase of ES&S. Another potential method for greazin' the palms, it appears, is the capturing (and expanding) of the loosely structured "education" allowance for voting machines -- now running into the tens of millions for a state like SC, and those who can assign those contracts are sitting in a nice greazy spot indeed.

It isn't just the humidity here that makes me want to take six showers a day.

Bev Harris

[goclark]

215. Go get um Bev

you have been our hero when NO ONE else had the vision to step up to the plate. We can look at all the polls we want to and say how close or how far Kerry is from Bush.

Bur, if the Rethugs mess with this election, we can have all the votes and we will still not win - just like 2000.

Bless you for your vision, your hard work and your brilliance.
You are truly a drum major for justice!

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

11. as always, you crack me up

It's so gratifying to be proven right.

All along I've pointed out that you seek nothing so much as publicity and personal enrichment. And all along you've disingenuously rebuffed my claim, while spouting a lengthy stream of technical inaccuracies and outright fabrications. At various times along the way you've angrily (and inaccurately) accused others of trying to sabotage your efforts by doing exactly what you now claim to be doing, to wit, filing a Qui Tam lawsuit. And in the most flagrant act of hypocrisy imaginable, you hurled your vitriolic accusations while you were filing a Qui Tam suit behind their backs, lol. Clearly you just didn't want anyone to try and jeopardize your own personal jackpot. For shame.

It's sad that so many people here buy into your bullshit, especially when it's been debunked so thoroughly and so often. It's utterly vital that people actually get out and vote, but your constant fear-mongering will accomplish nothing but keeping people away from the polls. I'd express the hope that you can actually sleep at night, but I'm sure the thought of 30% of $42 million ($12.6 million, by my count, since none of the counties are going to join your ridiculous campaign) provides some small amount of comfort, lol. Thank goodness you had the foresight to set up a little BBV tax shelter before unveiling your big presumptive payday -- it'd be a shame if you had to let even a single dollar slip through your fingers.

Here's to hoping that Diebold spends roughly triple the cost of your home on high-profile defense attorneys, and recovers it from you when your "case" gets thrown out of court as quickly as the rest of your frivolous lawsuits. Here's some free legal advice: this time around, try to come up with some actual evidence -- not just a few printouts of propaganda from your web site.

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:


(cue the usual flurry of clever rebutting smileys from Paranoid Pat)

[AP]

15. Now that it's in the courts, we'll see everyone's evidence.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

16. evidence?

I actually look forward to seeing everyone's "evidence". I am vindicated each and every time Bev, Andy, and the rest of the gang get laughed out of court by an actual judge.

Of course you're missing the point entirely, but that's fairly expected from the BBV crew.

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[AP]

18. The qui tam hasn't been tossed out of court.

I appreciate your desire to spin this, but why bring the case if you don't think you have a claim? That would only leave you with lawyer's fees.

I'm satisfied to judge this thing on the evidence that will be in court, and not by your spin or even Bev's, for that matter.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[Jim Sagle]

35. Chickenshit bullshit.

[Andy_Stephenson]

39. For your information...not that you deserve it...

I recieved a letter yesterday from a former Washington State Supreme Court Judge. He is an attorney...he is also quite interested in the BBV issue. My case is far from over in Washington. That is all I can say right now on the issue...but I might add...He who laughs last, laughs the longest.

Nice seeing you again TFHP...we thought you had jumped off a cliff.

edit: :Hi: agent Mike...

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[stickdog]

57. Should our votes be physically auditable?

Yes or no.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

76. sure

I've actually said so a hundred times... you can look it up.

Of course there isn't a single word in the lawsuit about whether the votes should be physically auditable. Not one. So I fail to see your point. And don't you think the omission's fairly telling?

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[stickdog]

115. What's telling is you spend all you time fighting anti-BBV activists and

none fighting BBV.

[Occulus]

143. DINGDINGDING

We have a winner.

[Occulus]

142. Not if that's not what the suit isn't about.

If audits are irrelevant to the merits of the suit itself, the subject shouldn't be brought up.

Have you ever been in court, for anything? If you had, you would know this.

By your posts, quite blatantly: you don't know WTF you're talking about.

[ParanoidPat]

145. DINGDINGDING.....

.....We have a winner! :evilgrin:

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

151. DINGALING!

RINGADINGDING!

We certainly do have a winner... too bad it's not the voter. :(

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

150. I think triple negatives are poor form

I was clearly responding to stickdog's question at post #57, to wit, about whether the votes should be physically auditable. I was merely asking the relevance of the question, since neither voter-verification nor auditability is an issue in the lawsuit.

I agree with you 100% inasmuch that if audits are irrelevant to the the suit, the subject shouldn't be brought up. And this suit is about Bev getting paid, not election auditibility.

Of course one could argue that maybe the suit should be about auditibility, voter-verification, election reform and that sort of thing. But that's an entirely different debate. As far as this discussion goes, you're absolutely right: the subject of audibility has no place in Bev's lawsuit -- there's simply no profit in it.

Thanks for kicking this important thread! :thumbsup:

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[Occulus]

152. Profit was never the point.

Recompense to Bev is QUITE justified, I should think.

As to this:

"And this suit is about Bev getting paid, not election auditibility."

In a word, natch. Again, money going to her is NOT the issue, although I would think she deserves it in SPADES. She's done a lot more for the public than a certain Publisher's Clearinghouse winner I could mention, someone I know personally.

This *was never* about money. A Qui Tam just happens to be the single best way she can hurt Diebold et al, but good.

The concept of financial punishment is dealt with very well in the novel "Runaway Jury." While fictional, it does make one very good point: the only thing large, monied corporations understand regarding punishment is a large jury award. Always has been, always will be, because our courts are too gutless to unilaterally shut down a corporation without awarding a dime.

Corporate personhood plays into this as well. It's surprising to me that I'm the only one to bring up that angle of the issue.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

153. no, profit was always the point

Your argument is childish. The BBV issue is not about "hurting Diebold" -- it's allegedly about real election reform, protection for voters, and safeguarding their vote. And there's none of that in the lawsuit... no matter how many straw men you erect and no matter how much spin you put on it.

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[Occulus]

160. And financially harming these companies DOESN'T do that

exactly how?

Corporations only and always understand one thing above all others: harm to their financial bottom line. Do you somehow not know this?

In what way was profit always the point, if she a) was against a Qui Tam in the first place because evidence would be kept sealed and b) now HAS filed such a suit because, under circumstances involving overriding public interest, said evidence CAN be made public?

The money is *incidental* to the reasons behind her filing the Qui Tam. There's nothing contradictory at all in this, and I would have done the very same thing; any reasonable person would.

AND- if she was in it for the money from the get-go, why can I download the book on this topic for free with her consent?

Oh, I get it. She's devious as hell and she's a USER. Mmmmmmmm-kaaaay.

How do you come to that conclusion, when she's lost so much money thus far on this project? Do you think this suit was her object from the get-go?

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

164. nope

You say:

The money is *incidental* to the reasons behind her filing the Qui Tam.

Nonsense. There's not one word about election reform in the lawsuit. Go read plaintiff Jim March's many comments on the issue -- you'll have to go to the original source since they've been purged from this thread. The whole thing is about making themselves a bunch of "bigtime fun money" -- he says exactly that, and you can read it for yourself.

You further point out:

There's nothing contradictory at all in this, and I would have done the very same thing; any reasonable person would.

Sure, I'd probably sue too. The difference is that I wouldn't screw over all my friends, colleagues, and supporters in the process. And I wouldn't make out like I was doing something especially noble -- I'd totally go all Jim March about it and post about my plans for a new BMW. Then I'd buy a bunch of toys, make a big donation to John Kerry, and blow the rest lobbying for tort reform. :)

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[truthspeaker]

168. so when are you filing your suit?

Put up or shut up.

[ParanoidPat]

194. I'll kick it again!

This suit is about the taxpayers getting reimbursed for tax monies spent on junk equipment sold to us under fraudulent conditions. :)

Once again you show an utter lack of understanding of the laws of the state of California. Here's a link to them, http://www.lawresearch.com/v2/statute/statstate.htm#elections

Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how one can sue for an audit trail in California elections? Better yet, just let us know how you ask for that as a remedy in a FRAUD suit? I'm all ears!

If you look closely, you'll find that California has a provision that allows companies that have been convicted of fraud in State contracts to be barred from doing future business in the State.
Fool me once and all that. :evilgrin:

[AP]

75. Right on! A word to you underdogs out there: don't bother trying.

TFHP says not to.

Jeez.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

77. now you're just putting words in mouth, lol

Here's a better quote for you: "don't stab your friends in the back."

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[AP]

78. Frankly, I don't care HOW the issue gets raised. I just care THAT it gets

raised, and I find all those activists who thought that making this about money somehow degraded the core issues a little naive.

If you want a bunch of naive amatures driving this issue into obscurity, by all means recruit them anonymously on the net and then limit your ability to get anything done by chosing to be as underfunded as possible.

When this issue is before voters and the courts, they're still going to care more about the facts than they will about the personalities of the people driving it.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[AP]

88. BBV is a threat to democracy regardless of the personalities of those...

...involved in trying to shine a light on it.

I really think Bev's way of doing it is the only way to get that light shined on it. If the people who are criticizing her here had done it their way, BBV would be something that about 40 people complain about on DU without anything ever coming of it.

As for the nature of the suit -- I suspect that that's all a whistle blower suit can do: seek damages for contracts already entered into. I don't think it can enjoin Diebold from entering into future contracts. That's a separate matter requiring vigilance by voters.

That doesn't mean we should ignore the fact that BBV companies like Diebold were paid a lot of taxpayer money to do things that they didn't do. It's so incredibly right to sue them for that money if there's a case that can be made (and I don't see how anyone can deny a prima facis case HAS been made -- apparently this case has been before the courts since November and hasn't been tossed out on a Diebold motion to dismiss, right?).

You're complaining about Bev's personality now, but you've always complained about the merits of the claims first and formeost, and then used Bev's personality to bolster your criticism of the merits.

As I said from the beginning, I hoped there was money in it for the people working hard to expose BBV, because lord knows the people who like BBV have a lot of money too and are incredibly well-resourced. And like I said above, the personalities of the participants are so much less important than the issue of whether these claims have merit, and, furthermore, I'm not sure there's even an indirect correleation between those facts.

Furthermore, there's no rule that some saint out there can't bring a Qui Tam if they want to. And there's nothing stopping other activists from pursuing this issue without Qui Tams, or raising money at all (good luck to those people).

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

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

[AP]

94. Let me repeat myself:

1) It's my understanding that qui tam suits can only recover contractual damages. It can't do anything more. I could be wrong. But the things you are complaining about, I suspect, need to be achieved other ways, and that doesn't mean the qui tam suit is unwarranted. For the sake of argument, say those aren't remedies available in a qui tam. Do you think that she shouldn't pursue it just because it can ony get taxpayer money back that has been spent and do no more?

2) I haven't ignored that point. You have never been only worried about Bev's hypocrisy. You have alwasy said that her claims had no merit, and you're jumping all over this because you hope that discrediting her personally will discredit the underlying claims. I've addressed why I think Bev's personality is irrelevant. I also think there's a direct correlation between the fact that Bev might possibly make money off this and why it's even in the media at all.

[americanstranger]

95. But where does the money go?

Do you think that she shouldn't pursue it just because it can ony get taxpayer money back that has been spent and do no more?

It doesn't go back to the taxpayers. It goes to those who file Qui Tam.

That was the big issue when this was brought up re BartCop - Bev accused him of getting tready to file a Qui Tam. I also remember something about how that would dmage the BBV movement and destroy all the hard work that had been put into it to that point. Here's the quote:

"When we discussed it amongst ourselves, we each independently came to the conclusion that doing this for money was the wrong thing to do, and doing something that will put a federal gag order on what's wrong with voting machines is a VERY wrong thing to do.

We aren't soiling ourselves with Qui Tam money. Go for it. And if you don't end up disappeared (because remember, Ashcroft gets a full 60 days when you can't even tell people what you know or that you filed the case), and if under some bizarre circumstance Ashcroft appoints a federal judge who will actually treat your case fairly (hah!), and if you stand up to what is sure to be a relentless attempt to destroy your credibility in every way, and if your evidence proves your case, you will split up a few hundred million dollars.

In the mean time, the rest of us will be focusing on retaining the right to vote and to have that vote counted properly for all those who come after us."

Who said that? Read it here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=4052&forum=DCForumID70

And now we're just 'hilarious' and 'commies' for asking these questions. Back then, we were 'on Rove's payroll.' Read the thread.

-as


ON EDIT: I'm most definitely a dope for even bringing this up. Just opening myself up to be called another whole bunch of nice names.

[AP]

96. 85% to taxpayers if gov't joins suit, 70% if they don't. The most Bev

could get is 30%. If the suits have merit, and so long as there are no political disadvantages viz Diebold or anyone else, the state BETTER join these cases (and they probably will so long as the cost-benefit analysis works out -- ie, if the state is confident that Bev will win without their help, and their costs of prosecution don't exceed 15% of the potential award -- if they did, they'd make more money for taxpayers by staying out of the suit).

At least that's my understanding from reading the OP.

Anyone who knows more, feel free to dispute it.

As for Bev's behaviour, this is all I have to say: who cares.

Say she came up with an invention that could save lives, but she needed help from others on the internet to put the last 33% of the data in place. Everyone involved in helping felt they were doing their part pro bono, and, in fact, felt that the invention should be made available free. Well say she works with these people, and suddenly gets paranoid that they're going to take the project in all sorts of directions which she felt would make her invention worthless, so she goes a little crazy and cuts off a lot of people and pisses them off.

Months later, the invention's on the marketplace. It looks like she's going to get rewarded for her labors. The public just might benefit a great deal from it (and it's likely that if there weren't the carrot of $$$ at the end of the stick the invention never would have made it to the marketplace), then so what? I don't really give a shit about what went on in the development stage. I just want to make sure that product is on the market.

And the fact is, there's no patent on what Bev is doing. If anyone else wants to make money (or not make money) they can go out there and do the exact same thing or do it in a different way.

Go for it.

[americanstranger]

98. Fair enough.

I still don't understand why when someone else was (allegedly) planning to file Qui Tam it was a bad, bad thing. and now that Bev is doing it, we get a rousing chorus of 'who cares?'

Maybe Bev could explain her change of stance, because she sure seemed like she thought Qui Tam was a bad idea when BartCop was (allegedly) planning to file it.

And what about the part where 'everything goes under federal seal?' That was bad then, but it's not bad now?

Call me stupid, but I'm losing something in the translation here. Nobody ever accused me of being the smartest person here, BTW. But I'm noticing a lot of the people who seem angry with the suit now were defending Bev's decision then - and a lot of the defenders sounds pretty pissed in this thread.

-as

[Eloriel]

100. Your explanation is in the press release (OP)

And the rest of what you're confused about is pretty well explained in various posts throughout the thread.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

102. an invention to save lives??

That is the absolute worst analogy I've ever read, lol.

And let's contemplate for a moment whether Alameda county will actually join a lawsuit against their election equipment vendor less than 4 months before election day, lol. Actually forget the four months... absentee ballots need to be mailed out 45 days in advance, which means the county needs to start their election preparations within a few weeks from today. But yeah... maybe they'll just say 'to hell with it' and sue instead. ;)

Of course the state is a different matter altogether -- they're not actually limited by any piddly annoyances like having to actually hold an election. And (as Bev is always quick to point out) Kevin Shelley did recommend that the attorney general pursue some kind of charges against Diebold a few months back when he went on his decertifying binge. Of course (as Bev never actually points out) when a grand jury was convened to actually examine the evidence and decide whether to proceed, they concluded that:

a) there were no grounds for any charges, and (hilariously)
b) Kevin Shelley had grossly overstepped his authority as secretary of state with his actions.

But hey, maybe Bev's lawsuit will work out better. In the meantime, Kevin Shelley's already re-certified most of the machines he originally decertified -- including the very machines Bev's suing about in Alameda county. Here's a question for you to ponder: given all of the publicity over the issue, given all of the information at his disposal, given all the concerns that he's previously stated, and given his publicly-stated feelings about Diebold, why would he do that?

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[AP]

105. Is this the GJ you're talking about:

The jurors attended poll worker training sessions and monitored polling places in March, but they did not review all the evidence that Shelley used in deciding to ban some Diebold machines, jury foreman Thomas McCarthy said.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040528/news_1m28voting.html

[stickdog]

113. Except the software was still uncertified and the voters still don't have

an auditable voting system.

So either the legal approach was flawed or the grand jury was full of shit -- as so many on this issue have been, present company included.

[SDent]

134. I'm with ya man

I TOO remember when Bev saying "You're just trying to file a qui tam suit! you're a traitor! you're just in it for the money! was her unique way of positioning herself as the only one with sincere intentions in this whole issue...

the irony is...

well... just

i'm

godmsacked.

sleep well bev, if you can.

sam

[Occulus]

148. If her assumption at the time

was that all evidence presented would remain sealed, well, her assumption that the person filing would be in it just for the money would be reasonable.

That's no longer the case; apparently, if there's an overriding public interest, the evidence in a Qui Tam suit *can* be made public. That's what changed her mind.

GOD, I'm glad I pay attention to these niggling little details.

[Occulus]

147. grrrr

does anyone bother to READ anymore?

Apparently, when there is overwhelming public interest, the evidence presented in a Qui Tam suit *IS* available to the public. That's been the whole point from DAY ONE, and the money is totally incidental. If Bev puts it into bbv.org and into fighting e-voting as it is currently done, GREAT! Wonderful, and I wish her the best.

Keep in mind, she's lost a LOT of her own hard earned cash, AND money she otherwise WOULD HAVE earned on her own, following this issue. DAMN STRAIGHT she should get something back in the end!!

Or do you have a problem with people who turn in a criminal because there's a $400,000 reward on their head? That's the whole point of the financial aspect of this type of suit, as I see it- to get people to come forward and expose corruption.

That *should* have a reward.

[ParanoidPat]

149. AMEN!

And thanks! :evilgrin:

[AP]

101. Here's the CA Qui Tam stat.Seems like $ is all you can get.No Injunctions.

http://www.all-about-qui-tam.org/cgi-local/quitam/articles.pl?s=statelaws&a=ca

I looked through it very quickly, but it looks like money is the only remedy you can seek. It doesn't look like an injunction is an available remedy.

You are bringing a suit to recover money the state falsely paid out to some private party. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[AP]

103. However, as P.Pat points out, Bev is seeking an infunction under sep.stat.

... the California Unfair Competition Law.

See her post below.

[Occulus]

144. Thank you.

You said everything I wanted to say... but you said it nicely.

You should have seen the post I was GOING to make. I hit the 'back' button at the last second instead.

[ParanoidPat]

97. "There's no relief requested that would benefit the voters. None."

Complaint FILED UNDER SEAL

Defendants DIEBOLD ELECTION SYSTEMS, INC. and DIEBOLD, INC. manufacture, sell, license and service computerized voting systems to state and local governments throughout the United States for use in federal, state, and local elections. Plaintiffs bring this complaint under the California False Claims Act to recover for the people of the County of Alameda and the people of the State of California millions of dollars unlawfully obtained by defendants and their employees and agents through submission to the County of Alameda of false claims for payment (using State funds) for a computerized touch screen voting system. Plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief and disgorgement of profits pursuant to the California Unfair Competition Law, based upon defendants’ misleading advertising and other unfair business practices in marketing and securing contracts for its computerized voting systems with the County of Alameda and 16 other county governments throughout California.

Um, did you even bother to read the complaint? :shrug: :evilgrin:

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

104. perhaps I missed the part about the voters

How exactly does that help the voters?

Where's the request for a voter-verified paper ballot?

Where's the request that Diebold's machines be decertified?

Where's the request that Diebold be barred from doing business in California?

Guess they forgot to put those into the suit.

:JC:

[AP]

106. She's seeking an injunction. I thought that was your critieria.

[ParanoidPat]

107. You don't understand the law at all do you?

You put up a whole bunch of 'straw man' arguments like "How exactly does that help the voters?" and "Where's the request for a voter-verified paper ballot?" when you should be aware by now that Kevin Shelly, S.o.S. of California has already decertified the Diebold TSx machines and the California Voting Systems Panel have already conducted an investigation that revealed that ALL Diebold equipment used in 17 Counties had used uncertified software in elections here.

You also seem to have missed the statement K.S. made when he said on Friday, April 30, 2004,
"I want to state clearly and unequivocally: there will be a paper trail for every single vote cast in the state of California, and it will happen on my watch". Link

Should the suit be won, Diebold will be barred from doing business in California under State law. :)

Nice try though! :evilgrin:

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

131. that's nonsense

First, no Diebold machines are decertified in Alameda county, which is the entire focus of the lawsuit. Your irrelevant point about the TSx machines in other counties is a poorly-constructed straw man, nothing more. Voters in Alameda county will cast their votes in November on Diebold-supplied touchscreens; nothing in the lawsuit addresses that.

Second, Kevin Shelley's stated intent is completely independent of the lawsuit. This is simply another poorly-constructed straw man: the lawsuit itself does not request a paper ballot, trail, record or anything else for either the upcoming election or any other election.

There's nothing in the lawsuit that would prevent Diebold from doing business in California. That one doesn't even qualify as a straw man, it's just wishful thinking on your part.

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[Occulus]

154. Would a large money award prevent them?

MEthinks not, legally..... but it would make a LOT of hay in the press, AND send a huge message to Diebold. It would force them to change their tactics.

The ramifications and repercussions would reverberate throughout the state. This is called reading BETWEEN the lines. OR-

What would a $400 million punitive damage award do to, say, the tobacco industry? Military contractors? Food for thought, that.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

155. that's hopelessly naive

Mostly it would make them triple the retail price of the VVPB-printer they'll eventually sell to California to satisfy Kevin Shelley's new requirements.

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[yowzayowzayowza]

159. NO.

It'll make someone else's printer more competative... Someone who will be under new scrutiny to perform in a manner more in the public interest.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

162. someone else's printer?

Whose? ES&S? Sequoia?

Well done, team!

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[yowzayowzayowza]

163. ... or perhaps...

...shudder... an open source system.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

165. an open-source printer?

That's just silly.

Besides, who would the next people sue if California just downloaded some cheesy open-source, freeware election system off the internet?

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[yowzayowzayowza]

166. Oops...

dupe delete

[Name removed]

167. Deleted message

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

[Occulus]

146. And with "friends" like you....

at least, I *think* that's how the quote goes...

[shance]

222. Seeing what you write, I think Id pass on having you watch out for my

back.

Do you think if you keep harping on these blatantly false accusations of yours, (ie, lie) long enough, people will start believing it?

Moreover, you will start believing it?

Problem is that you need a network to achieve something like that TH.

Heck, who knows? They might be hiring at Fox.

[nomatrix]

157. tinfoilhat, you haven't looked have you?

http://failureisimpossible.com/agenda/votingmachines.htm

Evidence isn't what you are looking for.

[ParanoidPat]

17. _|_

:)

[Trajan]

27. Nothing proves you right ....

red herring and non sequitur ....

[Jim Sagle]

34. Chickenshit bullshit.

[TeacherCreature]

48. I don't know anything about the various personality clashes

I do think BBV is a major problem. Citizens deserve to own the voting process, not private companies that may have an interest in changing legitimate election results.
Personally I think we need to go back to paper ballots. It works in candada.

[stickdog]

56. An activist who is a publicist is seeking publicity for her worthy cause.

Well, I guess that alone proves she's despicable in your bizarro world.

Right?

[kiahzero]

121. Did ad hominem arguments suddenly cease being logically invalid?

Just curious.

[Zorra]

212. Wally, is that you?

[Zomby Woof]

214. you too, huh?

And I thought I was the only unbeliever. :-)

You are spot-on about the publicity aspect, it's her stock-in-trade - literary publicist.

And to add insult to injury, she isn't even a regular voter.

People have given their lives to vote, a sacred right being mocked by these hypocritical lawsuits and thin-skinned allegations against those who would dare challenge the veracity of her claims.

It has Barnumesque written all over it, and almost iron-clad too! Who wants to knock someone who is allegedly making sure our votes are counted? I hesitated to, but then I thought, no, this reeks of self-aggrandizing bullshit.

[alfredo]

13. Good luck guys!

Kick

[northofdenali]

14. This is very important! Way to go, Bev -

I still cannot believe the incredible amount of time, effort, heart and sould you've given this issue. :yourock: :hug:

[AmyDeLune]

26. Kick! n/t

:)

[cheezus]

40. also with the kicking

:kick:

[GreenPartyVoter]

30. Excellent!

[Zan_of_Texas]

36. From the first line of the initial post.....

California lawsuit unsealed seeking restitution from Diebold for fraud - may fund Black Box Voting organization.

Okay. Contrary to one poster, I don't read the sentence as meaning any proceeds WILL fund the non-profit organization.

It says MAY.

We are all here because we believe in representative government. That means, we give our vote and our support and sometimes time and energy AND TAXES to representatives who will then represent our collective positions. That's how it's supposed to work. It's a great model.

Money, media, and plenty of other things get in the way.

Bev, I believe you have done two stunning things in the BBV effort.

(1) You have gathered enormous amounts of information and put them together and been incredibly persistent and smart and courageous and downright stubborn. Without you, the computer scientists would still be talking among themselves, and the country would not be waking up to the dangers of electronic voting.

(2) You have pioneered a new way of doing exactly that, which is to work in a group to accomplish it -- you have used the talents of programmers, researchers, writers, graphics people, political people, web people -- on and on -- to accomplish the common goal, which is to have honest elections. You have used DU and the internet to create a new model of activism. You have motivated people to sacrifice, to stay up until the wee hours when they need their sleep, because this is a just and urgent cause. People volunteered their time. Some donated in-kind gifts or money when they could.

So, when millions of dollars in potential recovery enter the picture, are you going to pretend that (2) never happened? Because I for one think that (2) was as important as (1).

Capitalism IS a different model than community activism. And, hey, community activism and volunteerism are NOT the same as communism.

You have appealed to the altruistic, better side of hundreds if not thousands of people, Bev.

Please treat that model of cooperation and trust with the same reverence you treat any monetary recovery.

[RedEagle]

38. Taking a deep breath and entering a whirlwind

That's what Bev did. Think she didn't know what some would say? I've talked to Jim March and getting Bev on board wasn't easy.

What EVERYONE is missing is that kudos go to attorney Lowell Finley for making this work such that the only thing under wraps was the existance of the case. Jim and Bev have continued on, not held back one bit.

If Qui Tam means keeping your mouth shut until the case is settled or keeping shut up about it forever, then this would have been a no-go from the start. Qui Tam is a means for corporations to buy off silence, use the system to settle for money and shut whistleblowers up.

That's not happening here. And if Bev and Jim have pledged money, IF they get any, and they don't contribute to Black Box Voting, I'm quite sure they'd never hear the end of it.

What's happening is that a brilliant lawyer, Lowell Finley, is directing the proceedings.

Counties in California who have been attempting to sue the Secretary of State to keep their paperless machines, if they have Diebold, are going to have to think twice about what they are doing, if compensation becomes available to get them out of their ill-thought-out purchasing decisions.

Diebold and the NFB have been caught hand in hand. That argument is about to get left in the dust.

This movement is not going to scare voters off. Getting auditability back into the voting system will have quite the opposite effect, it will encourage people to vote because they will have some assurance their votes will count- as they intended.

And for those of us who work behind the scenes, we appreciate Bev's efforts and the fact that she is the person in the public on this issue. That makes her a lightening rod for all kinds of things. If she just gets compensated for what this effort has cost her, that's the least she is due.

It's one thing to get attention on a forum. It's quite another to be the one handling national exposure on it. Most of us don't have to face that.

And I like the idea that Lowell, Bev, and Jim turned the Qui Tam issue on it's ear and made it work in a way that was beneficial to the cause by not stopping what they do, how they do it, or what they say about it.

I appreciate Bev and Jim's guts in seeing this through.

I applaud Lowell for his tenacity and dedication to the cause. We are going to owe this man a great debt of gratitude.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

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

[KoKo]

37. Great News Bev!!!!!!! And, this article is a good read and keeper for

the newbies here on DU :toast:

[gristy]

41. checkin' in

Thanks Bev. For everything.

[DWright]

44. My 2 cents

Bev,

I cannot properly express to you how outraged I am at this action on your part.

I'm trying to remember how many times you FALSELY accused me and the other Georgia activists of filing Qui Tam. Over and over again. When I told you it was not true you accused me of being naive... or of lying. I guess I should have known, or at least suspected, that you might be protesting too loudly.

Well, NOW I feel naive.... for believing YOU. And, frankly, I feel I (we) have been stabbed in the back. I don't want the money a Qui Tam law suit can provide (as, again, I've told you over and over). I am not now, nor have I ever been involved in this fight to make money. I want these machines stopped. PERIOD.

I'm still too angry and upset to say much else. I hope like hell that this action on your part doesn't have long-term negative ramifications on this fight. But if this suit of yours stops ANY action against these voting machine companies I will never forgive you for doing it.

Good luck with John Ashcroft's Department of Justice. I'm sure they'll welcome your suit with the same open arms that they offered to Sibel Edmonds.

Denis Wright

http://countthevote.org

[Kelvin Mace]

46. deleted message

Deleted message

[SDent]

135. Word!

I can't name the tireless activists I've met over the years who want nothing for themselves.

not to mention the ones who never stooped to selling clinton cigars to get there.

not to not to mention those who didn't just recently come out and admit they don't vote democrat.

this REEKS.

[ParanoidPat]

210. "come out and admit they don't vote democrat"???

So this is a Democrat(sic) issue? :shrug:

BTW, IIRC, Bev hosted a web page for someone else selling Clinton cigars.
Does your local grocery store sell to (gulp) REPUBLICANS? :wow:

Yeah, something around here REEKS! :evilfrown:

[Kelvin Mace]

45. After accusing so MANY people

of money grubbing last Fall, after all the outrage, name calling, and vile insults, you step forward and file a "qui tam".

Words fail me.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[Eloriel]

47. Dontcha think the LEAST she shoulda done

was call those people -- or, hell, email them (let's make it ULTRA simple) -- prior to posting notice of her little coup and not only let them know about the new developments, but also freaking APOLOGIZE?

You'll notice there's no apology YET for all those false allegations impugning the honesty and integrity of dozens of people who NEVER were interested in a cent on this issue.

I'll say it again: Under the circumstances (i.e., no gag order), I don't have a problem with her and Jim going after this (altho I had to laugh at his chortling over how MUCH money he hopes to gain on another forum -- he certainly has his priorities straight as a BOARD MEMBER, doesn't he?). It's just the hypocrisy and lack of regret or remorse over those she wronged.

[yowzayowzayowza]

54. Though I can scarcely imagine...

dealing with the black sedans, our friend Mike, the wrath of Diebold, being new to activism in such a charged issue, ... etc, it would seem that a harmless ounce of contrition could go a long way .... Otherwise, we are left with an outrageous analysis like that of our friend TinfoilHatProgrammer.

[Kelvin Mace]

59. Agreed

Just one simple apology.

[Eloriel]

51. Let's kick this for

a little wider distribution. After all, it is a press release.

[ConsAreLiars]

53. Good news for ALL who have put energy into this. Finding the opening

in the Qui Tam laws (so that filing does NOT require giving up the right to speak freely and continue working as an activist) was a real blessing, since it helps put more talent and money behind the suit and calls for real damages being paid. As a contrast between this and a simple civil suit, look at the NAACP settlement with FL regarding the unlawful purging of voters, and how weak a deterrent that has been, apart from the fact that the guilty were never held to account.

And as I see it, ALL who have participated in BBV work deserve credit and should take some pride in this accomplishment. The fact that many activists prioritized different paths is natural and a real plus overall, since no one attack alone will ever win the whole war. The fact that some stresses resulted is natural also, and is just the way things are. Without an overview local perspectives on resources and goals may seem to be at odds, so the desire to concentrate limited resources on achievable goals can turn into a quest to define the "best" single attack plan, with inevitably irreconcilable differences. Still, in all but the worst cases the discussions yield light as well as heat. Fortunately, although their are one or maybe two individuals who have sought to sabotage the whole endeavor, the vast majority of people posting here have contributed greatly, and deserve our thanks.

Strength comes through diversity and clarity through a full and open discussion of differences. DU has been a helpful forum for understanding and confronting this threat to democracy.

[Kelvin Mace]

58. Not the point...

And as I see it, ALL who have participated in BBV work deserve credit and should take some pride in this accomplishment.

I am quite proud of what everyone did to fight for open and honest voting machines. The problems is that Bev impugned the integrity of many activists accusing them of using this issue to enrich themselves via a "qui tam" law suit. And now, we discover she was doing the very thing she accused others of doing.

And still, NO apology is forthcoming for Rox, Eloriel, BartCop, Lynne Landis, Rebecca Mercuri, David Dill, the EFF and the many others who were accused publicly and privately of filing a "qui tam" in order to enrich themselves at the expense of what anti-BBV activists were fighting for.

This makes me ill.

[oasis]

55. kick

[Kelvin Mace]

60. Bev's OWN words on Qui Tam

BevHarris
Jul-05-03, 10:24 PM (ET)
The TRUTH behind the demands for Black Box findings

A Qui Tam suit.

Each of the key researchers on this issue discussed the possibility of filing for Qui Tam money. The partipants deserve respect for what I feel is a nearly heart-stopping show of honor, each and every one of the researchers turned down the possibility to make millions, deciding that the issue of democracy was too important to cash in and shut up.

Here's the deal on Qui Tam: Yes, you can file, and this gives you protection, BUT: From the moment you file, it all goes under federal seal.

Who controls whether the lawsuit will see the light of day? Basically, John Ashcroft.

When we discussed it amongst ourselves, we each independently came to the conclusion that doing this for money was the wrong thing to do, and doing something that will put a federal gag order on what's wrong with voting machines is a VERY wrong thing to do.

We aren't soiling ourselves with Qui Tam money. Go for it. And if you don't end up disappeared (because remember, Ashcroft gets a full 60 days when you can't even tell people what you know or that you filed the case), and if under some bizarre circumstance Ashcroft appoints a federal judge who will actually treat your case fairly (hah!), and if you stand up to what is sure to be a relentless attempt to destroy your credibility in every way, and if your evidence proves your case, you will split up a few hundred million dollars.

--------------------------------------------------
Now, I understand why she's been threatening, harrassing and doing everything possible to get me to sign over my rights to the book.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[yowzayowzayowza]

61. In all fairness...

Bev's Qui Tam is a STATE action not a FEDERAL one, the possibility of which did not came about until months later. Ie, no Ashcroft, no prohibition on continued activism. Correct?

[Kelvin Mace]

62. Doesn't matter

to me either way. MANY people had their integrity impugned when Bev accused them of filing a "qui tam". Bev and her lawyer have hammered on me to get me to relinquish my writing credit and publishing rights to the BBV book as well as turn over the blackboxvoting.com domain to them (something I will NEVER do!). I was accused of TAKING MONEY (presumably from Diebold) to "sabotage" the book. I was threatened with a smear campaign on DU unless I immediately turned over the rights and the domain.

Whether it is state or federal, stepping in to make money now is just beyond belief.

I don't know the source of the quotes from Jim March, but if these are accurate, then it is plainly obvious that its about the money.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

65. accuracy

The source of the quotes

helpfully,
:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[graham67]

66. Yeah I'd want him on my board of directors

It means Viacom and Diebold are now engaged in a race to see who can make ol' Jim a millionaire first.

Jesus Christ.

[Kelvin Mace]

67. "Jesus Christ", indeed!

Enjoy the money, Jim. It's not 30 pieces of silver, but then 30 pieces of silver doesn't buy what it used to.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[ParanoidPat]

71. Thirty pieces of silver?

Are you really trying to equate suing Diebold with betraying Christ? :shrug:

I find that very telling! And on a Sunday no less. :evilgrin:

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

84. sounds about right

Lining their own pockets at the expense of the voters? The analogy seems pretty a propos to me.

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[ParanoidPat]

87. How about these?

1) Every elected official in the country.
(I know where their paychecks come from!)

2) Every voting machine manufacturer, their employees and stockholders.
(I suspect I know where the $3.8 billion for HAVA came from.)

3) Every member of our armed forces.
(Last time I checked, they may have all volunteered to serve but they still get paid.)

4) Every Defense contractor, their employees and stockholders.
(They sure aren't building the 'tools of the trade' just out of a sense of patrioti$m!)

5) Every member of the United States Postal Service.
(They keep upping their rates but they never show a profit. How do they stay in business?)

6) Every farmer and rancher who takes a farm subsidy to NOT produce something in order to limit supplies and keep prices high.

When I look at all of the above, Bev, Jim and Black Box Voting.org 'et al' profiting from the services they rendered to me as a taxpayer is a far superior use of my tax dollars.

:toast:

:kick:

[Kelvin Mace]

169. You are missing the point....

What makes this egregious is the fact that Bev viciously attacked innocent people and accused them of doing the very thing she's now doing, for whatever reason.

She has attacked people of good intention and caused them huge amount of personal and professional grief. I am not talking about Diebold, I am talking about her ALLIES.

I see NO apology for accusations she made that WERE 100% WRONG. The silence from her on this point is DEAFENING.

I have had to hire a lawyer to protect myself from her. I have been accused of incompetence, fraud, consorting with the enemy, theft and endured libelous remarks on this very board. And now I find out Bev plans to get paid while working hard to drive me and my company into bankruptcy!

No, sorry, can't overlook this.

[stickdog]

114. Diebold is THP's savior.

Hasn't that been obvious from the beginning.

[Kelvin Mace]

170. No, I am equating it

to Bev's betrayal of other activists. You keep missing the point, so let me spell it out:

Point 1) DIEBOLD DESERVES ALL THE GRIEF THAT CAN BE HEAPED UPON IT.

Point 2) BEV IS NOW PROFITING FROM THIS IN A MANNER SHE SWORE SHE WOULD NEVER DO, AFTER ACCUSING MANY LOYAL AND HONEST PEOPLE OF BETRAYING HER FOR THE VERY SAME MONEY WHICH THEY HAVE NEVER DONE.

[stickdog]

68. Bev has been the most effective activist on issue so far.

From the same post:

Attorney Lowell Finley came to me in October offering to be my lawyer for a Qui Tam suit, explaining how much massive potential "bounty" was at stake. I refused to get involved unless Bev was a co-plaintiff, getting as much money out of it all as I got. Bev was initially against the idea because it wasn't the first Qui Tam approach she'd gotten; the difference with Lowell's approach is that under California rules and court precident, people who were "initial information generators" (which includes both Bev and myself) did NOT have to "completely seal up" what they were doing. They'd have to keep quiet about the Qui Tam suit itself, but they could still dig up new data and share it with the public. Which we've done, in spades...finding and getting a declaration from James Dunn for example cost Diebold four counties in late April of '04.

[Kelvin Mace]

70. Bev didn't do it by herself,

she had lots and lots of help. Help from people she later accused of all sorts of skullduggery.

I do not question that Bev has contributed a lot. What I dispute is the claim she made in this very forum several months ago:

This was my work product, folks. My research. My time. My publicity efforts. My proofing. My structural editing (didn't get that, either). My fact checking. My Pulitzer-Prize deserving work.

It wasn't all her work. She had LOTS of help.

[stickdog]

111. That is true. I saw her get a lot of help right here on one of the most

important issues of the day.

That's why this infighting bothers me so much. This is simply too damn important. We can't have good activists working at cross purposes here.

I wasn't here for the food fight that seems to have preceded this lawsuit, so my only emotion is disappointment that good people working against an obviously corrupt and unacceptable state of affairs have decided that "defending their turf" is more important than working together to get fully auditable voting systems.

[Eloriel]

130. That is unfair, stickdog

There's no turf war here, not in any way I understand the term.

People typically end relationships when those relationships become abusive -- at least the healthy /smart people do. To expect folks to stick around to take more abuse is asking too much. To expect those WRONGED to take it on the chin and keep working with the wrongdoer and not ALSO expect the wrongdoer to make amends is unrealistic, at best.

[Kelvin Mace]

171. With respect stickdog

If you had her lawyer breathing down your neck, if you had her threatening you for things you had not done, if you had to see your good name smeared with lie after lie, then you would understand how I, and many other people burned by Bev feel.

[stickdog]

173. Please don't take my observations personally.

I'm simply observing a distressing state of affairs -- namely, a group of good activists who used to feel comfortable working together who don't anymore. Once again, I missed the entire dust up and now merely see the boken pieces on the floor.

I'm wasn't making any accusations or judgments, just noting this sads state of affairs. From what I've just recently gathered, it seems to me that Bev owes some people some explanations (probably wrapped in apology, as well).

Personally, I'm in favor of any sort of rapprochement that would best advance and coordinate anti-BBV efforts. I realize that this is easy for me to say since none of these conflicts included me.

[Kelvin Mace]

174. Thank you

Hell, I just got off the phone with a concerned voter who wants to do something about this because he feels the country is in danger (it is).

It causes me great pain now to deal with this issue due to what Bev has done, but I do it any way.

I was not snapping at you, just trying to make sure the context was clear.

I wish she had kept the disagreement private, since it put me in a awkward position of trying to explain the situation without damaging her credibility.

Sadly, she has now made those efforts moot.

[SDent]

136. oh please

who really cares?

we're talking about personal integrity here people.

[blm]

63. Thanks to you, David and ALL us activists who pushed this story and

kept it alive.

BIGTIME KUDOS ALL AROUND.

[OKNancy]

69. blm did you read the whole thread?

Hi friend - All I have to say is : I told you so. ;-)

[blm]

110. Didn't have time.

I have now.

Whoa.

[salin]

118. have to admit

I thought about you... as I read this thread... :hi:

[Cookie wookie]

64. This isn't Bev Harris' movement

Many, many people worked hard, night and day, doing without, hurting themselves financially and in so many other ways, their sacrifices are endless. They shared their information with Harris and have watched her make wild accusations (like accusing THEM of filing Qui Tam), and call herself the investigative reporter on the issue. They have mostly kept quiet because the issue was more important than who was getting credit.

Harris is a disgrace to the movement.

Kudos to Roxanne, Eloriel, Denis, the whole Georgia Coalition who have worked their hearts out, David Dill and all the people at Verified Voting, the folks at Johns Hopkins, especially Avi Rubin, and so many many more across the country who have labored behind the scenes and are true patriots.

And finally, as long as I'm doing a tribute to the others on whose backs Harris has taken her ride, let's not forget Athan Gibbs of TrueVote, who died in the line of service.

Enjoy yourself Harris.

:puke:

[americanstranger]

72. And I think BartCop deserves an apology.

My, God, the vitriol that was thrown his way for asking a couple of questions...

And at the time he was accused of wanting to 'cash in with a Qui Tam suit.'

I'm sure he's laughing his ass off out there in K-Drag this minute.

-as

[Kelvin Mace]

74. BartCop wanted to help

during the whole Diebold DMCA issue. He was offering Bev space on a server that would ignore attempts to stymie what she was saying. She suspected him of working on a "qui tam" and that he would "steal" her files.

He got so angry at the baseless accusation that he has pretty much steered clear of the issue since.

[Eloriel]

73. Aargh

For some reason, Desert, your post brings it all home for me. I could go sob hysterically -- for hours, if not days.

You're so right -- MANY people have been deeply involved and worked hard, and many of them have sacrificed greatly -- lotta people and things we'll never even know about, probably.

Btw, thanks for your inclusion of me, but in reality my involvement was miniscule -- big mouth on the forums, mostly. And I'm not currently involved in the issue otherwise, either.

I am just hoping Bev haasn't shot her credibility in the foot with this.

[Cookie wookie]

79. One question

Since Harris would have had absolutely nothing without the help of all the other people and organizations , did she ask any of them to participate, so that they could share in much needed funding for their efforts?

As far as I know in Georgia, she not only didn't. Actually how could she after accused them of filing Qui Tam, without any evidence whatsoever and to their continued protestations that the accusations were false? Hey if I'm wrong, and she asked other groups to join, I'll be happy to admit it. Just want to know, after all, if not, it doesn't look good for her image as a crusader for justice. Now that I think about it a bit, the way she treated everyone and her constant taking ownership of everything: "My research, my book" etc, starts to make even more sense. We all just shrugged our shoulders, kept up the work behind the scenes, and conjectured that she could just be a self-centered egomaniac. Appears there was method in her madness, so to speak.

Wonder if her lawsuit hurt the movement, as she told everyone it would when telling them not to file.

As far as your efforts, Eloriel, but I thought you edited a bbv report , mainly because Harris was dragging her feet about getting information out, and put it directly into Howard Dean's hands when he came to Atlanta last fall . . .

[Eloriel]

99. I was just thinking about that this afternoon....

Since Harris would have had absolutely nothing without the help of all the other people and organizations , did she ask any of them to participate, so that they could share in much needed funding for their efforts?


What I was thinking is that I've changed my mind on the matter. The lawsuit is filed by two individuals, not BlackBoxVoting.org (or whatever the 501(c)(3) corporate name is). For all I know, though, such a suit must be in the name of one or more individuals rather than a corporate entity (?). Not only that, but there's no indication any of the other funding-plagued groups were offered any participation. Perhaps they were and declined? Perhaps the attorney didn't want too many cooks in the kitchen? And, of course, Jim March's attitude is a little off-putting, esp. for a board member.

BUT, none of that is my business, really, and I certainly won't be losing sleep over the moral and ethical dilemmas of others.

As far as your efforts, Eloriel, but I thought you edited a bbv report , mainly because Harris was dragging her feet about getting information out, and put it directly into Howard Dean's hands when he came to Atlanta last fall . . .

Yes, I wrote a 50-plus page report. And, in fact, it's my understanding that the report made its way into the hands of all the major (or was it all nine?) candidates, which I found enormously gratifying -- thanks to the efforts of someone (a friend of a friend) in New Hampshire. I don't, however, consider the report all that much of a contribution to the cause. NOR, sadly, did it result in any of the candidates immediately DOING anything about the matter. :shrug: Apparently they all needed a little more critical mass. LOL -- I can tell you this, though, I went into literal panic attacks as I was writing that thing. At first I didn't even realize what was going on with me, since panic attacks aren't my "thing." It was just so overwhelming to see the whole thing pulled together in one place.

[graham67]

108. Jim March's attitude

Eloriel wrote,

"Jim March's attitude is a little off-putting, esp. for a board member. "

I think that's a huge understatement. Speaking as someone who doesn't know shit about the BBV players or the legitimacy of any gripes posted here, his comments alone would make me think twice about getting involved with anything that would help "make ol' Jim a millionaire". Can ya'll see how this might look to someone on the outside looking in?

[ParanoidPat]

117. I could care less about what someone else 'thinks".....

.....If you take the time to vote, thank you. If you take the time to weigh in with your representatives over this issue thank you that much more! If you actually take the time to spread the word to others and actively push this issue in the press, BLESS YOU! Whether you do it through BBV.org or not is not the issue.

If you want to PM me I can give you a list of hundreds of DU threads on this issue as well as a complete archive of the GABBV E Group missives that Eloriel spurred to bring you up to speed on what has been going on. There were plenty of charges and counter charges levied about by all parties. Dredging all that crap up does nothing to further the ultimate goal of an honest election this time around and I will not play that game.

A toast :toast: to ALL who, against all odds, got this issue into the main stream!

The Black Box Voting issue is bi-partisan. Jim March is NOT the whole of BBV.org any more than I am. Whatever his motivation is, is HIS and HIS alone! I may not agree with him on many things, his stance on guns for instance, but I'm glad to have him on our side of this issue despite his stated motives for being so.

Ya gotta keep your eyes on the prize if ya know what I mean! :evilgrin:

[yowzayowzayowza]

125. And exactly which prize is that...

prey tell(sic); the Pulitzer or the retirement account? Unfortunately in the real world, what people 'think' goes a long way towards who and how they TRUST. Don't get me wrong. I think the suit is amazing work and a fantastic development. Unfortunately, the 'behavior' along the way remains suspect, like it or not.

[ParanoidPat]

129. Fair, auditable elections.....

.....for all. :evilgrin:

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

133. quotables

The actual term used by the plaintiffs is "bigtime fun money", as I recall; alternatively I believe "loot" is considered an acceptable substitute.

:tinfoilhat" JC :tinfoilhat:

[ibegurpard]

191. your "concern" about this issue is touching

Thank God there are many other reputable people out there who have cast doubt upon electronic voting as it now stands.

[Cookie wookie]

258. After our bill for vvpb

was killed in committee by Georgia House Democrats (I kept telling them we were on THEIR side, for pete's sake), I just had to take a break from the issue, though at times it's been hard. But I know what you mean by overwhelming. I couldn't stop crying everytime I thought about it, so I had to just get in my garden and dig. Still doing it. You see, we lost the right to vote in Georgia and most voters here don't even know it. I have always voted all my life. I am tearing up right now just thinking about it. The fact is, Diebold pulls the strings in Georgia when it comes to our July 20 primary and the November election. Thanks to Diebold puppets including Cathy Cox, Kathy Rogers, Brit Williams and all their acolytes, including reporters like Carlos Campos from the Atlanta Journal Constitution who even after the League of Women's voters changed their official stance spun it into oblivion with this, "League still backs state's voting system" 6/15/04, ""We still absolutely, 100 percent, feel the system in Georgia is a good system," said Meg Smothers, executive director of the League of Women Voters of Georgia. Georgia is one of only two states that rely
exclusively on electronic voting, using a system championed by Secretary
of State Cathy Cox." Unfu*king believable.

I never lost my vote before. After all, this is America (?). I couldn't stop it, and Eloriel, I know you gave your all as well. Is that comfort for you? It is some small comfort for me, but I can't seem to stop mourning.

[Kelvin Mace]

262. The fight ain't over

I have faith in Diebold's overweaning arrogance and stupidity. They'll screw it up and give us the ammo we need.

It's hard, I know.

[Cookie wookie]

80. One question

Harris says, "Private donations provided start-up funds for Black Box Voting. Potential funding may come from a lawsuit filed against Diebold Election Systems in California. Unsealed on July 9, 2004, it will, if successful, provide additional funding for the organization."

Since she would have had nothing without the help of all the other people and organizations, did she ask any of them to participate, so that they could also have much needed funding for their efforts? As far as I know in Georgia, she not only didn't. Actually how could she after accused them of filing Qui Tam, without any evidence whatsoever and to their continued protestations that the accusations were false). Hey if I'm wrong, and she asked other groups to join, I'll be happy to admit it. Just want to know, after all, she seems to be the one to be out for a big windfall here. Wonder if her lawsuit hurt the movement, as she told everyone it would when telling them not to file.

As far as your efforts, Eloriel, I thought you edited a bbv report , mainly because Harris was dragging her feet about getting information out, and put it directly into Howard Dean's hands when he came to Atlanta last fall . . .

[Kelvin Mace]

181. Exactly...

I am now getting a number of other pieces of this puzzle from folks who are pretty upset about this action.

If the suit was filed in November, the discussion were probably going on in Sep-Oct, about the time that Bev turned on Eloriel, DemActivist, et al.

I certainly never heard anything about it and had told Bev on a number of occasions that I would never be party to such a suit.

So, it was done behind my back.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[Fud]

112. She has lost her crediblity a long time ago

Making basesless accustions long ago.If making attacks on other dems is her style then all gloves are off.She is a libertarian for christsakes and doesn't even vote.

I'm getting tired of this publicity hound.

If she manages to win money in the suit will she give it to democratic causes?I doubt it really.Bev you are only damaging the cause and just looking out to make money which you accused many of us of doing when we didn't have a fucking clue what qui tam was.

And you wonder why you get booted off of forums?Give me a break even a dumb guy like me knew you were after the money from day one.

Do the right thing in case you win the money and donate it instead of keeping for yourself.

[stickdog]

116. Cathy Cox deserves all the scorn in the world.

THIS ISN'T A PARTISAN ISSUE!!!

[ParanoidPat]

120. She hasn't lost any credibility with me nor anyone I've been working with

here in California! In fact, quite to the contrary, her actions in getting this into the courts has gained her a number of new converts to the cause. :)

Now you on the other hand..... LOL! :evilgrin:

You mind filling us all in on what you've accomplished in this regard? :shrug:

Have I just missed you in the press?

[Fud]

122. Lol about what?

I prefer to associate with people that are credible and liberal in the press.Which part of that don't you understand instead of going lol?Anyone can go lol with a response but that doesn't mean a thing at all.

Really that was kind of goofy to give a response like that if you don't know the history at all.

[ParanoidPat]

123. Well I have all 40 of your other posts from here, so tell us......

......You mind filling us all in on what you've accomplished in this regard?

Have I just missed you in the press? :shrug:

[americanstranger]

128. Oh, here we go....

deja vu.

-as

[Fud]

132. 40 posts?Who cares

Paranoid pat in case you haven't noticed post counts mean little.So what have you done to elevate the liberal cause?

I work on liberal websites since my state is a really safe lib state.What have you done paranoidpat.No wonder you picked a nickname like that.

You think post counts are a badge of honor?Did it ever occur to you that people hang out at other forums as well?Guess not.

Lets see i have 2344 posts on the bartcop forum and thats after we changed the software and moved.You have 1000+ so please do not talk down to which you know nothing about ok it only makes you look foolish.

[ParanoidPat]

138. Well all I can say is I've done my small part right here in California....

.......:evilgrin: I've also read the election laws for all 50 states, contacted every member of the Senate and Congress, contacted every election official in California as well as other states that use DRE's, compiled a complete list of all County elections officials for all 50 states, here's an example for California,

CALIFORNIA

Secretary of State - Kevin Shelly

California Secretary of State
1500 11th Street
Sacramento, California 95814

Phone: [phone]

Elections Division

Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
TDD: 1 800 833 8683 (No Charge to Calling Party)
Vote Fraud Hotline: [phone] VOTE (8683) Recorded
E-Mail: [email protected]
Contact: http://www.ss.ca.gov/cgi-bin/print_form.cgi

Elections Division Home
County Elections Supervisors
State Election Code
Voter Registration Information
Voter Registration Form - English
Voter Registration Form - Spanish
Absentee Voting Information
Absentee Ballot Application - English
Absentee Ballot Application - Spanish
Absentee Ballot Application - Tagalog
Absentee Ballot Application - Japanese
Absentee Ballot Application - Chinese
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/Outreach/absentee/links/VT_absentee_ge2004.pdf">Absentee Ballot Application - Vietnamese
Absentee Ballot Application - Korean
Voting Equipment Page
Election Results Page (Historical)

Contact The California Office of the Attorney General

PUBLIC INQUIRY UNIT

The Attorney General's Public Inquiry Unit seeks to assist you in answering questions on a wide variety of issues ranging from consumer fraud to public safety. It is generally a clearinghouse for consumer complaints and requests for information.

You can contact the Public Inquiry Unit at [phone] or, within California, by calling [phone].

MAILING ADDRESS

California Department of Justice
Public Inquiry Unit
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Here's the decertification documents. (PDF) :evilgrin: :thumbsup: :toast:

:kick:Decertification of AccuVote-TSx Voting System:kick:

Decertification and Conditional Certification for certain DREs

Voting Machine Type & Contact Information by County for California.

Alameda (01) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-TS ------ touchscreen / DRE
Bradley J. Clark, Registrar of Voters
1225 Fallon Street, Room G-1
Oakland, California, 94612
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:30am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.alameda.ca.us/rov/index.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Alpine (02) ------------ Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Barbara K. Jones, County Clerk
99 Water (Federal Express Only)
P O Box 158
Markleeville, California, 96120
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:30am - 12:00pm / 1:00pm - 5:00pm
http://www.co.alpine.ca.us/dept/clerk/clerk.html
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Amador (03) ------------ ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
Sheldon D. Johnson, Registrar of Voters
500 Argonaut Lane
Jackson, California, 95642
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.amador.ca.us/depts/elections/index.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Butte (04) ------------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Candace Grubbs, County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar
25 County Center Drive
Oroville, California, 95965-3375
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1-800-894-7761 (Toll Free within Butte County only)
Hours 9:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.calaveras.ca.us/departments/recorder.html
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Calaveras (05) --------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Karen Varni, County Clerk
Elections Department
891 Mountain Ranch Road
San Andreas, California, 95249
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 4:00pm
http://www.co.calaveras.ca.us/departments/recorder.html

Colusa (06) ------------ ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
Kathleen Moran, County Clerk-Recorder
546 Jay Street
Colusa, California, 95932
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:30 - 5:00pm
http://www.colusacountyclerk.com/doc.asp?
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Contra Costa (07) ------ Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Stephen L. Weir, County Clerk
524 Main Street
P O Box 271
Martinez, California, 94553
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/depart/elect/index.htm

Del Norte (08) --------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Vicki Frazier, County Clerk-Recorder
981 H Street, Room 160
Crescent City, California, 95531
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.del-norte.ca.us

El Dorado (09) --------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
William E. Schultz, Recorder-Clerk - Registrar of Voters
2850 Fairlane Court
P O Box 678001
Placerville, California, 95667
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.el-dorado.ca.us/elections
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Fresno (10) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Victor E. Salazar, County Clerk/Registrar of Voters
2221 Kern Street
Fresno, California, 93721
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 7:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.fresno.ca.gov/2850/index.html
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Glenn (11) ------------ Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Vince T. Minto, County Clerk-Recorder
516 W. Sycamore Street
Willows, California, 95988
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.countyofglenn.net/Elections/home_page.asp
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Humboldt (12) --------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Carolyn Wilson Crnich, Recorder, County Clerk & Registrar of Voters
3033 H Street
Eureka, California, 95501
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:30am - 12:00pm / 1:00pm - 5:00pm
http://www.co.humboldt.ca.us/election
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Imperial (13) --------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Dolores Provencio, County Clerk-Recorder
940 West Main Street,
Suite 202
El Centro, California, 92243-2865
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.imperialcounty.net/Election

Inyo (14) ------------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Beverly J. Harry, County Clerk/Registrar of Voters
168 North Edwards
P O DRAWER F
Independence, California, 93526
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 9:00am - 12:00pm / 1:00pm - 5:00pm
http://www.countyofinyo.org
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Kern (15) ------------- Diebold AccuVote-TSx ----- touchscreen / DRE
Ann Barnett, Auditor-Controller-County Clerk-Registrar of Voters
Elections Office
1115 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, California, 93301
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.kern.ca.us/elections/
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Kings (16) ------------ Sequioa Optech ----------- optical scan
George Misner, County Clerk-Recorder
Government Center
1400 West Lacey Boulevard
Hanford, California, 93230
Phone: [phone] Ext: 4401
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.countyofkings.com
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Lake (17) ------------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Diane C. Fridley, Registrar of Voters
255 North Forbes Street
Lakeport, California, 95453
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 9:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.lake.ca.us
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Lassen (18) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Theresa Nagel, County Clerk
Courthouse
220 South Lassen Street, Suite 5
Susanville, California, 96130
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 9:00am - 12:00pm / 1:00pm - 4:00pm
http://www.clerk.lassencounty.org/registrar.htm
General Election Information E-Mail address: [email protected]

Los Angeles (19) ------ InkaVote ----------------- optical scan
Conny McCormack, Registrar - Recorder/County Clerk
12400 Imperial Hwy.
Norwalk, California, 90650
Mailing Address:
P O Box 1024
Norwalk, California, 90651-1024
Toll Free: 1 800 815 2666
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.lavote.net
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Madera (20) ----------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Rebecca Martinez, County Clerk-Recorder
209 West Yosemite Avenue
Madera, California, 93637
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.madera-county.com
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Marin (21) ------------ Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Madelyn De Justo, Assistant County Clerk/Registrar of Voters
3501 Civic Center, Room 121
San Rafael, California, 94903
Mailing Address:
P O Box E
San Rafael, California, 94913-3904
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am to 4:30pm
http://www.co.marin.ca.us/depts/RV/main/index.cfm

Mariposa (22) --------- Sequioa Optech ----------- optical scan
Marjorie Wass, County Clerk
Hall of Records
4982 10th Street
P.O. Box 247
Mariposa, California, 95338
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.mariposacounty.org
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Mendocino (23) -------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Marsha Wharff, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
Elections Department
501 Low Gap Rd., Room 1020
Ukiah, California, 95482
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.mendocino.ca.us/acr/index.html
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Merced (24) ----------- ES&S iVotronic ----------- touchscreen / DRE
M. Stephen Jones, County Clerk/Registrar
2222 "M" Street, Room 14
Merced, California, 95340
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.merced.ca.us/elections/index.html
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Modoc (25) ------------ Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Maxine Madison, County Clerk
204 Court Street
P.O. Box 130
Alturas, California, 96101
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:30 - 12:00pm / 1:00pm - 5:00pm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Mono (26) ------------- Sequioa Optech ----------- optical scan
Renn Nolan, County Clerk-Recorder
Annex II
Bryant Street
P O Box 237
Bridgeport, California, 93517
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 9:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.monocounty.ca.gov

Monterey (27) --------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Tony Anchundo, Registrar of Voters
1370 S Main St # B
Salinas, California, 93901
Mailing Address:
PO Box 4400
Salinas, California, 93912
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.MontereyCountyElections.us
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Napa (28) ------------- Sequoia AVC Edge --------- touchscreen / DRE
John Tuteur, Registrar of Voters
Napa County Registrar of Voters
900 Coombs Street, Room 256
Napa, California, 94559-2946
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.napa.ca.us/GOV/Departments
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Nevada (29) ----------- ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
Lorraine Jewett-Burdick, County Clerk-Recorder
HEW Building
10433 Willow Valley Rd., Suite E
Nevada City, California, 95959-2367
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://new.mynevadacounty.com./elections
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Orange (30) ----------- Hart eSlate -------------- touchscreen / DRE
Steve Rodermund, Registrar of Voters
1300 South Grand Ave., Bldg. C
Santa Ana, California, 92705
Mailing Address:
P O Box 11298
Santa Ana, California, 92711
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.oc.ca.gov/election/
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Placer (31) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Jim McCauley, County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar
2956 Richardson Drive
Auburn, California, 95604
Mailing Address:
P O Box 5278
Auburn, California, 95603
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.placer.ca.gov/elections
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Plumas (32) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-TS ------ touchscreen / DRE
Kathleen Williams, County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar of Voters
520 Main Street, Room 102
Quincy, California, 95971
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.countyofplumas.com/clerkrecorder/elections/index.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Riverside (33) -------- Sequoia AVC Edge --------- touchscreen / DRE
Mischelle Townsend, Registrar of Voters
2724 Gateway Drive
Riverside, California, 92507-0918
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.voteinfo.net

Sacramento (34) ------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Jill LaVine, Registrar of Voters
7000 65th Street
Sacramento, California, 95823-2315
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.saccounty.net/elections
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

San Benito (35) ------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
John R. Hodges, County Clerk-Auditor-Recorder
Courthouse, Room 206
440 Fifth Street
Hollister, California, 95023-3843
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.san-benito.ca.us/departments/car

San Bernardino (36) --- Sequoia AVC Edge --------- touchscreen / DRE
Scott Konopasek, Registrar of Voters
777 East Rialto Avenue
San Bernardino, California, 92415-0770
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.sbcrov.com
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

San Diego (37) -------- Diebold AccuVote-TSx ----- touchscreen / DRE
Sally McPherson, Registrar of Voters
5201 Ruffin Road, Suite I
San Diego, California, 92123
Mailing Address:
P O Box 85656
San Diego, California, 92186-5656
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.sdvote.com
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

San Francisco (38) ---- ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
John Arntz, Acting Director of Elections
City Hall - 1 Dr. Carlton B Goodlett Place, Room 48
San Francisco, California, 94102-4635
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.ci.sf.ca.us/election/index.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

San Joaquin (39) ------ Diebold AccuVote-TSx ----- touchscreen / DRE
Debbie Hench, Registrar of Voters
212 North San Joaquin Street
Stockton, California, 95201
Mailing Address:
P O Box 810
Stockton, California, 95201-0810
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.san-joaquin.ca.us/elect
General Election Information Contact Form: http://www.co.san-joaquin.ca.us/elect/contact.htm

San Luis Obispo (40) -- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Julie Rodewald, County Clerk-Recorder
1144 Monterey Street, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, California, 93408-3237
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.sloclerkrecorder.org/elections/electionsmain.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

San Mateo (41) -------- ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
Warren Slocum, Assessor-County Clerk-Recorder
40 Tower Road
San Mateo, California, 94402
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.shapethefuture.org
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Santa Barbara (42) ---- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Joseph E. Holland
County Clerk, Recorder and Assessor
1101 Anacapa, 2nd Floor
Santa Barbara, California, 93102
Mailing Address:
P O Box 159
Santa Barbara, California, 93102-0159
Phone: 805 SBC VOTE (722 8683)
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.sbcvote.com

Santa Clara (43) ------ Sequoia AVC Edge --------- touchscreen / DRE
Jesse Durazo, Registrar of Voters
1555 Berger Drive, Bldg. 2
San Jose, California, 95112
Mailing Address:
P O Box 1147
San Jose, California, 95108-1147
Phone: 408 299 VOTE (8683)
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.sccvote.org
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Santa Cruz (44) ------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Richard W. Bedal, County Clerk-Recorder
701 Ocean Street, Room 210
Santa Cruz, California, 95060-4076
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.votescount.com

Shasta (45) ----------- Sequoia AVC Edge --------- touchscreen / DRE
Ann Reed, County Clerk
1643 Market Street
Redding, California, 96001
Mailing Address:
P O Box 990880
Redding, California, 96099-0880
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.shasta.ca.us/departments/countyclerkregistrarofvoters/index.html

Sierra (46) ----------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Mary J. Jungi, County Clerk-Recorder
Courthouse, Room 11
P O DRAWER D
Downieville, California, 95936-0398
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 9:00am - 12:00pm / 1:00pm - 4:00pm
http://www.sierracounty.ws
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Siskiyou (47) --------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Colleen Baker, County Clerk
311 - 4th Street, Room 201
Yreka, California, 96097
Mailing Address:
P O Box 338
Yreka, California, 96097-9910
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/clerk/index.htm

Solano (48) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-TSx ----- touchscreen / DRE
Laura Winslow, Registrar of Voters
P.O. Box I
Fairfield, California, 94533
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.solanocounty.com/elections
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Sonoma (49) ----------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Janice Atkinson, Assistant Registrar of Voters
435 Fiscal Drive
Santa Rosa, California, 95403
Mailing Address:
P O Box 11485
Santa Rosa, California, 95406-1485
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.sonoma-county.org/regvoter/index.htm

Stanislaus (50) ------- ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
Lee Lundrigan, County Clerk-Recorder
1021 I Street, Suite 101
Modesto, California, 95354-2331
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 4:00pm
http://www.stanvote.com

Sutter (51) ----------- Mark-A-Vote -------------- optical scan
Joan Bechtel, County Clerk-Recorder
463 Second Street
Yuba City, California, 95991
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.sutter.ca.us/index.aspx?doc=depts/cr/elections.xml

Tehama (52) ----------- Sequoia AVC Edge --------- touchscreen / DRE
Mary Alice George, County Clerk-Recorder
444 Oak St, Room C
Red Bluff, California, 96080
Mailing Address:
P O Box 250
Red Bluff, California, 96080-0250
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.tehamacountyadmin.org/Departments/Elections.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]/elections.cfm

Trinity (53) ---------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Dero B. Forslund, County Clerk-Recorder-Assessor
101 Court Street
Weaverville, California, 96093
Mailing Address:
P O Box 1258
Weaverville, California, 96093-1258
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.trinitycounty.org/elections
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Tulare (54) ----------- Diebold AccuVote-OS ------ optical scan
Jimmy R. Allen, Auditor-Controller/Registrar of Voters
221 South Mooney Blvd., Suite G28
Visalia, California, 93291-4596
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.tularecoauditor.org/elections

Tuolumne (55) --------- ES&S Optech -------------- optical scan
Tim R. Johnson, County Clerk-Auditor-Controller
Elections Department
39 N. Washington St., Suite A
Sonora, California, 95370
Mailing Address:
Administration Center
2 South Green Street
Sonora, California, 95370-4696
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm

Ventura (56) ---------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Phil Schmit, County Clerk-Recorder-Registrar of Voters
800 South Victoria Avenue, L-1200
Ventura, California, 93009-1200
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.ventura.org/election/elecidx.htm
General Election Information E-Mail Address: www.ventura.org/recorder/faqie.htm

Yolo (57) ------------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Freddie Oakley, County Clerk-Recorder
625 Court Street, Room B05
Woodland, California, 95695
Mailing Address:
P O Box 1820
Woodland, California, 95776-1820
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.yoloelections.org
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

Yuba (58) ------------- Datavote ----------------- punchcard
Terry A. Hansen, County Clerk-Recorder
915 8th Street, Suite 107
Marysville, California, 95901-5273
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Hours 8:00am - 5:00pm
http://www.co.yuba.ca.us/clerk/clerk.html
General Election Information E-Mail Address: [email protected]

I also worked with a team of IT people from several Fortune 100 companies to do a line by line examination of the Diebold code before any of the now infamous 'reports' came out.

And you've done what again? :) Cut me some slack, I don't make a dime from this and it's cost me more than you'll ever know.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

139. well done

I stopped reading when you misspelled "Shelley" right off the bat. :thumbsup:

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[ParanoidPat]

140. From you that would figure.....

.....:)

On Edit: Sometimes a typo is really just a typo! :evilgrin:
Sorry I didn't hit the 'e' key hard enough for you and damaged all of the subsequent information. :(

[Occulus]

156. *snerk*

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

158. of course, I'm a stickler for accuracy

A typo. Alrighty.

I'll take your word for it and look at the rest.

Hmm. It jumps out at me right away that Mischelle Townsend isn't actually the registrar of voters for Riverside county. Probably another typo I suppose. I don't want to impugn that mighty fine research you've done there.

(*snerk*)

:tinfoilhat: JC :tinfoilhat:

[Occulus]

161. Now you're just plain wrong, as of today

Posted on Tue, Jun. 22, 2004


Riverside County registrar of voters retires

Associated Press



RIVERSIDE, Calif. - The woman who brought electronic voting to Riverside County is retiring and moving to Pismo Beach, officials said.

Mischelle Townsend, 57, will retire July 17. She cited family reasons for ending a 30-year career in county government, including the past seven years as registrar of voters.

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/8981731.htm

Today is July 12.

So, who was it you're working for again?

Seems you're not as much a stickler for accuracy as you claim to be. You just lost ALL credibility with me. Nice knowing ya, though.

(edit: you'll delete or correct the completely inaccurate part of your post, right?)

[ParanoidPat]

219. Hey! Cut him some slack. He was close enough by Diebold standards!

:evilgrin:

[harmonyguy]

286. ParanoidPat - Please Contact Harmonyguy by PM or Email tnx nt

[blm]

245. PP, Fud is a topnotch poster at bartcop.

If folks like bartcop, David Allen (Plan9 publisher), Roxanne, Fud and americanstranger (TBTM) were burned in any degree, there has to be cause for concern. The integrity of these staunch activists and loyal progressive Democrats has been beyond reproach for years.

[althecat]

126. Hi guys... who has been having their posts deleted?

Just curious.. wondering if it is usual suspects or if I have been missing something important here.

al

[yowzayowzayowza]

127. Mostly just TFHP...

tho Eloriel's first post and Bev's reply got jerked for some reason.

[shance]

220. Some bold talk there Fud for someone who hasnt been around much.

Self righteous indignation is only allowed after 100 posts.

:)

Im joking.......sort of. what is the problem?

Of course I dont want to get into a flaming match with anyone, but the attacks are getting to be one-sided.

Bev (yes, along with others) has been instrumental in getting this movement where it is today.

Would those of you criticizing her have the ability to accomplish what she has accomplished?

If so, then why didnt you do what she did? In other words, Bev has taken extraordinary risks, efforts and steps to achieve what will benefit us ALL of us as Americans in the long run.

The people that have some issue with Bev I hope will realize that when they take a swipe at Bev, they hurt themselves and all of us in the long run. Our livlihoods, freedom, and futures of those that will be here after we are gone are depending on it.

A few of you who are criticizing Bev are Dean fans, and admire him Im assuming for the way he has handled his candidacy, from being the front runner candidate to starting a new organization that is creating positive, hopeful change within the Democratic party.

After the primary, Dean would have been in his right to take a break from politics, he could even have reacted by engaging in a fight and/or justified *scream* so to speak, he could have said adios to helping Kerry and the Democratic (DLC)party , and/or chose to move to Fiji for that matter, and it would have been understandable if he had decided to return home after such a tough, some would say highly contested primary.

But he didnt. I think he knew the party and all of us as Dems and activists needed his leadership and direction. He has continued to hold on to the big picture.

On a smaller level, that is what we must do too.

Its a given there will be times we are hurt, or mad, feel betrayed or resentful by people in our lives. Just remember to not take it personally, and to file it so that it doesnt happen again to you,* and move on.

We cannot afford to be distracted by petty divisive stuff. It will be the end of any success we make, if we fall weak to staying in such a place.

[Kelvin Mace]

221. Ummm...

Would you trust everybody or anybody for that matter if your life was being continuously harassed/threatened?

I am not aware of anybody having ever threatened Bev's life. She did get some nasty email once that was pretty disgusting.

Would those of you criticizing her have the ability to accomplish what she has accomplished?

Excuse me, but since some of us were right there with her, providing massive amounts of support, expertise and funding, do you really want to ask that question?

If so, then why didn't you do what she did? In other words, Bev has taken extraordinary risks, efforts and steps to achieve what will benefit us ALL of us as Americans in the long run.

As her publisher I was taking all the same risks she took. I (and many others) were deeply involved in the investigation and research. See, that's kind of the problem. She's great at publicity, but she's kind of forgotten everyone but herself when she's in those interviews these days.

The people that have some issue with Bev I hope will realize that when they take a swipe at Bev, they hurt themselves and all of us in the long run. In other words, if there is any battle, this is the battle worth coming together and fighting for. Our livelihoods, freedom, and futures of those that will be here after we are gone are depending on it. Its serious.

So, I, and other people are supposed to allow ourselves to be harassed, sued and see our good names destroyed by Bev? I am supposed to keep shelling out legal fees to deal with the baseless accusations being made against me while Bev gets more money so she can inflict yet more grief on me? See, Lowell Findley isn't charging her anything to try and bully me out of my rights, while my lawyer does charge me to answer such threats.

Its a given there will be times we are hurt, or mad, feel betrayed or resentful by people in our lives. Just remember to not take it personally, and to file it so that it doesn't happen again to you,* and move on.

Tell you what, I'll send you a letter threatening to do everything in my power to destroy you and you tell me if you can avoid "taking it personally".

Deal?

[shance]

226. Okay, what am I missing here?

Are you being sued by Bev? I dont understand.

You are mentioning things to me that I have no knowledge of.

I sincerely apologize if I came off pollyanna or simplistic.

Its not my intent. I am very concerned we will lose momentum at a crucial juncture because of distractions that are destructive rather than helping us deal with 2004.

I am hoping we can stay focused on getting the voting machines out of the way and getting the paper ballots in.

If you are being treated unfairly, then it is understandable and necessary for you to speak out.

[Kelvin Mace]

235. In order to see what I am up against

you have to read Bev's own words (and my own response) here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1333930#1336750

David

[shance]

232. Umm.....(the sequel)

Well, you cant blame a girl for trying.

Tried to edit after reading the ENTIRE thread.

I apologize for not reading the entire thread earlier under the assumption I actually knew most of what was going on.

Ive obviously been more out of pocket than I realized because apparently I have obviously missed some things.

I apologize if I came off pollyanna or simplistic.

I was being pollyanna and simplistic. :(

It was not my intent.

I do remain pretty concerned we could lose momentum at a crucial juncture because of any distractions which could be divisive rather than helping us deal with 2004.

I am hoping we can stay focused on the larger picture, keep moving forward and obtaining an auditable/transparent as possible system, and essentially get the voting machines out of the way and the paper ballots back in.

Anyway David, if situations ocurred where you have been unfairly wronged, and/or feel that way, then it is understandable you would want to clarify and state your own experience with regard to the whole situation.

[Fud]

234. Apology accecpted

Even if you didn't know or if even it was directed to my nick or others.This is an important issue and doesn't need to be messed up by a publicity hound that is just in it for the money.

A friend compiled a more reputable list of people that are serious about this instead of just trying to get on talk shows for fame and glory.People that don't know the whole story should read up a little first.Instead of ahhh just having a borg mentality.I don't want this very important issue being messed up by some super egomanical woman that doesn't know how to work a computer.

http://www.ballotintegrity.org
http://www.countthevote.org
http://www.votersunite.org
http://www.truevotemd.org
http://www.fairelection.us
http://www.blackboxvoting.com (David's organization, NOT the .ORG)
http://www.voterchoice.org
http://www.verifiedvoting.org/
http://www.moveon.org/front/

These people have integrity and not trying to make a quick buck like eh hummm.

[Cookie wookie]

257. Also we've had help from

TrueMajority and Moveon on actions in Georgia and how about DemocracyforAmerica's "Sorry Diebold! Americans want to: count Every Vote" petition -- gathered 130,000 last I saw.

[salin]

119. I follow most of what you have written

but over time have missed some things, who is/was Nathan Gibbs?

[Kelvin Mace]

179. If I recall correctly...

a fellow who rana small company that made a "good" voting machine. He was killed in an auto accident on his way to pitch the system to the Georgia assembly.

[Cookie wookie]

266. Athan Gibbs

"He wanted every vote to matter; Athan Gibbs, Sr. dies in crash"
http://www.tennessean.com/obits/archives/04/03/48330576.shtml

I knew Gibbs briefly. From the time I first saw him in a High School Auditorium just outside Atlanta, giving a demonstration of his voting technology, well it's funny strange, you know how some people you meet you're immediately on their side and just love them. Without really knowing them, but immediately? Well that's what it was like. I'd already seen a demo of his TrueVote voting technology (http://www.truvote.com/) at a panel on bbv in downtown Atlanta. It really turned me around. I already had been working on the issue, head down and pulling the plow, but didn't know any printing technology existed that solved all the (I found out later trumped up) problems with printing voter verified paper ballots. I telephoned him after that and drilled him, could his technology be retrofitted to Georgia's Diebold paperless vote stealing machines? Yes. And all the other questions were answered.

So, when SB500, a bill introduced in the Georgia State Assembly to require vvpat, and Cathy Cox our secretary of state falsely testified that there was no printing technology that could meet their criteria that was certified by NASED, then HA, I phoned Nathan and asked him to come down to Georgia (from Nashville, Tenn) and do a demo for the Senate committee hearing the bill. So he and a couple of other vendors came and disproved Cox right in front of God and the committee and everyone. What a moment. Afterward, the bill swept through the committee and Senate 52-3.

The man was articulate, passionate about voting rights (he'd been through the civil rights movement -- he was a 57 year old black man), but he had an aura about him of deep pools of morality.

I was trying to reach him on the his cell phone to ask him to come down again the following Monday, this time to do a demo for House members hearing the Bill at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, March 14, 2004. We had a couple of documentary filmmakers who were expected and there was a change that Ben Cohen might be there to meet with him. Athan's company could have used some help, I had come to believe.

I never got to tell him about Cohen. At 10:30 a.m. he was run off the road by an 18 wheeler on his way to work and died.

[mzmolly]

82. This may be the ONLY way to facilitate change.

Thanks again for all you do! :toast:

Please keep us posted.

[oasis]

83. Let's work through this while considering the sensitivities of others kick

[Cookie wookie]

85. Sorry for the double post

I'm new at posting here and obviously botched up, and it appears the clock ran out on deleting. My apologies.

As far as others sensitivities, that is all that's intended by my remarks: thinking of OTHERS because maybe it's time that people know that the movement to save our voting process from theft by touchscreen is a nationwide effort that has consumed the hearts and souls of -- at the very least -- dozens of Americans, who played crucial roles in getting us to where we are now.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

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

[hang a left]

90. Sounds like libel and conflict of interest to me.

snip>
She bases her whole theory on a continuous string of untruths," said Lou Ann Linehan, chief of staff for Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel. In the 1990s, Hagel headed voting equipment company American Information Systems Inc., which later became ES&S. Hagel maintains investments between $1 million and $6 million in McCarthy Group Inc., a private bank with a large stake in ES&S.

Harris, who dubs Hagel "poster boy for conflict of interest," says the Republican did not disclose the extent of his American Information Systems involvement and questions whether a former executive of a company whose machines count votes in precincts nationwide should run for public office. Hagel's staff insist that his former career doesn't affect his political life.
snippy poo>


Where have you been TFHP, I have missed you so.........NOT! Say hi to mike BTW.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[fla nocount]

124. Hey there Deleted Message.....welcome to DU

I know that you're new but most of write something down here on the message line. It's how we communicate.

[TinfoilHatProgrammer]

137. lol

:tinfoilhat:

[tom_paine]

92. Nice going, Bev. Put those bastards through discovery

Make 'em get Uncle Karl's Giant Size Shredders unlimbered!

[Pallas180]

109. CONGRATS BEV - is it in time for before the elections?

unbelieveable!

[redqueen]

172. Oh this is just nauseating n/t

[hunter]

175. Reluctantly, I kick this roller coaster soap opera thread...

So similar to "friendly fire" on the battlefield; so much as words may kill.

[yowzayowzayowza]

176. Lancing a boil is like that.

Though you may survive inattention, yer better off dealing with it to avoid the possibility of lethal festering and increased scaring. You just {Cheney}ing DO IT and move on.

[Kelvin Mace]

178. This requires Bev herself

confronting the fact that she was wrong and that she unjustly accused many people here of improprieties.

Other people are stepping up to the plate to defend this issue, but it doesn't get away from the central point:

Bev stated on this board and elsewhere that Roxanne, Eloriel and others where conspiring to file a 'qui tam" law suit in order to enrich themselves at the expense of Bev's efforts. She accused them of betraying the movement.

Time has proven that this is categorically, absolutely, without question, 100% FALSE!!

Morality,ethics and common decency require a person who has grievously offended someone and sullied their name with an untruth to make all efforts to restore that person's good name and to repent their actions.

This is not happening. Instead, Bev's surrogate, Jim March continues to spread the same lies.

One can only conclude that Bev either:

1) Still believes the the lie.

or

2) Has an ego that will not permit her to admit error and/or express contrition, even if it will undermine her credibility and harm the cause we ARE ALL FIGHTING FOR.

[Kelvin Mace]

177. The smearing of activists continues

Even as people run to Bev and Jim's defense, the lies continue to flow from Jim March's web site:

TFHP is a nut. Probably an employee of one of the voting systems vendors.

David Allen is Bev's original book publisher. He has severely ripped her off - I've seen the financial statements.

I have stolen NOTHING from Bev Harris. I am willing and able to prove this in court.

A number of other people denied Bev access to her own website for months. It's a long bloody story but there was definately fraud and theft of materials committed against her. The ONLY thing that makes sense is that there was an attempt to slow her down by people doing Qui Tams. Bev basically has more Qui Tam standing than *anybody*, myself included. Bev has strong suspicions as to which people were involved. I'm not going to comment on that because I don't have access to her server logs and the like.

No activist has conspired against Bev Harris. No one has stolen anything from Bev Harris. No one has defrauded Bev Harris.

While I may personally believe TinFoilHat is a agent provocateur, he is certainly not a nut.

Somebody talked about this being a bi-partisan issue. It certainly is, but Bev Harris has thrown in her lot with Jim March, a person every DUer should find morally repugnant. The man runs a web site with this motto:



Looking at Mr. March's postings, he is in this for the money. Saying that Jim's views don't reflect badly on Bev is disingenuous, since he is a board member of BBV.org recruited by Bev herself.

[Eloriel]

182. Whoa!

That's a pretty shocking graphic. Ewwww. I have some other things I'd like to say about it, but I'll demur. Besides, it pretty well speaks for itself, doesn't it?

[ParanoidPat]

188. Politics sometimes make strange bedfellows......

.....Once again, I may not agree with J.M. on MANY issues but when push comes to shove, this issue is about the most important thing any of us will ever be faced with! Free and fair elections in the only superpower left on earth. I wouldn't care if Saddam Husein came out in favor of paper ballots and filed suit against the lying bastards that sold this shit system to the American public, I would welcome anyone's support.

Honestly, trying to smear Bev with shit like Jim's political leanings or the product line she rep'ed for a customer is just a tad disingenuous. :eyes:

[Eloriel]

196. You know, Pat

*I* didn't write those things quoted in this thread -- Jim did. I don't quite understand David's "correction" re that graphic, but I take it that may not be Jim's website, but I'm not sure at this point if Jim has any connection with it or not. :shrug: I don't frankly care enough to go looking.

But in any case, *I* didn't smear Jim. I reacted to a graphic that I find offensive. MY personal opinion about that graphic, whether it relates to Jim or not, isn't a smear of Jim.

Apparently, neither Jim nor Bev are concerned about Jim's involvement as a board member for her 501(c)(3). That's fine, their call. HOWEVER, on this board we routinely look at who's involved in various oranizations -- corporations, PACs, etc. Why? Because it matters, that's why.

Also, please note that it's NOT his "political leanings" that have been trotted out here -- but rather his attitudes as posted by him on other forums. Most of the people who know Jim or know of him were already well aware of his Libertarin pro-gun poltiics.

Finally, even if your complaint had any validity, I think you used the wrong word. Disingenuous basically means -- well, here, look for yourself:

http://www.google.com/search?q=disingenuous%20definition

First one up: not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness;

LOL -- I've been ANYthing but disingenuous.

[Kelvin Mace]

183. Correction

This was not on Jim's site, but another site which I am not familiar with, thehighroad.org.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[ParanoidPat]

205. So to you TFHP is an activist for fair elections being smeared?

TFHP is a nut. Probably an employee of one of the voting systems vendors. Ummm, OK! :crazy: :thumbsup:

[Joanne98]

184. OMG I don't know what to think now

I remember that thread with Bart Cop when the Qui Tam was first mentioned. I just hope this lawsuit doesn't mess the whole thing up. If Bev can get paid for her work fine but who knows now? I don't believe her publisher would do her wrong. God, I hope this isn't getting sabotaged. I think Bev should at respond to him and on this thread. I can't remember his name. Is it David? I shouldn't say anything. This is so out-of-my-league.

[ibegurpard]

185. I know what to think.

Thank God there are enough reputable people out there who have validated the concerns about electronic voting to overcome any possible setbacks this could cause. I have no problem with anyone profiting from this. I also don't particularly care about accusations and hurt feelings. However, if the net result of this suit is to harm the credibility of this issue in the slightest, Bev Harris et al. will have a lot to answer for.

[Joanne98]

186. As a hugh fan of Bev's and someone who hasn't been involved

I can say that the "fan" sector would be horrified if the person who started this ended up sabotaging the whole thing. It's unthinkable. Bev needs to explain more. Especially to David and Eoriel. This is so hard-core.

[Eloriel]

199. Thanks, but

I don't even want any "explanations" from Bev. An apology for the PUBLIC false accusations would be nice, but even at that I think there are others (e.g., the various computer scientists and a good number of others) who were even more wronged, IMO.

[Joanne98]

201. I'm so sorry

I hope you get something and the others too. I know this sounds selfish but I want a happy ending to this story. It all seems so cut-throat. But maybe that's the way it has to be to fight forces this powerful. I hope that's the answer. Whatever happens the e-voting issue is too big to be in any one person's control now. Or at least I hope so. So many people worked so hard..........If anyone screwed it up now it would be too much to take. It would make everything feel so jaded.

[Kelvin Mace]

216. I know others are still fighting

and I know I am. I get calls every day. Unfortunately, when folks call me because they can't get Bev and ask my opinion on the matter, I am placed in a no win situation. If I refuse comment, there is no story. If I comment, Bev blows a fuse, calls up the reporter and demands retractions since I don't speak for her (which I make perfectly clear when I comment).

Why would anyone call me up? Well, my name is on the book and Bev makes numerous comments in the book (and made similar comments in earlier interviews before I became Satan's cabana boy) about how crucial I (and many others) was/were to the investigation. Of course, she doesn't do that any more. If you go back and read the recent AP profile, you'll see Bev did it ALL by herself.

When it suited her purpose (like when she was afraid to go on the Fox's "John Gibson Show") Bev would describe me as her co-author. At other times describing me as her co-author would result is a vicious tirade against me.

Classic example:

Bev accused me of "sabotaging" the book and ruining its profit potential.

In April, a division of a major publishing company (let's call them Penguin Books) called me to negotiate for the publishing rights for "Black Box Voting". I told them that I would be quite happy to sell them the rights and would entertain any reasonable offer. I told them that I was out of my league on a book of this importance and that all I wanted was to get the book in as many book stores as possible. I explained that their was some ill-feelings on Bev's part toward me, but that I would be willing to work with them if they could broker a deal.

We spoke three times and the editor was very excited about the book. I sent an email to Bev telling of the contact and imploring her to let them work out a deal and get the book into their hands. This was her response:

You will not be a party to any contract with Penguin Books.

She then lectures me at length about what rights I do and don't have and then informs me:

I will tell you that should there be an edition with a major publisher, it will be a new edition and will not include "with David Allen" nor will it include your writing for the tiny amount you actually contributed that I could use.

(The tiny amount I contributed was three of sixteen chapters, not to mention tons of other work she now describes as "minimal").

Shortly after this note, the editor spoked to her. He called and said they were no longer interested in the book. His reason? Other books were coming out in the Summer on the topic. Anybody seen any of these book?

Now you see a little of why I and many other people are upset. This is the high-handed way she treats people who have helped her.

And Lord knows, I have other examples. Many, many other examples.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[RedEagle]

275. Which Chapters David?

"(The tiny amount I contributed was three of sixteen chapters, not to mention tons of other work she now describes as "minimal")."

Which three chapters did you write? Please be specific, I want to put a notation in my book.

[Kelvin Mace]

279. Away from the office right now

so, I don't have the book handy. I wrote about the phone conference, the argument against internet voting, and the one on technical solutions (this was added to several others solutions from other sources). Lex Alexander, a newspaper editor with "Greensboro News & Record", edited the book (Bev's claims to the contrary not withstanding). Though his editing was severely limited by Bev's refusal to allow him to change anything more than spelling and grammar editing, as she "didn't trust his agenda". In fact, I was the only person who could get away with re-writing some of Bev's stuff for clarity.

[RedEagle]

281. You said you wrote three chapters, which ones?

"(The tiny amount I contributed was three of sixteen chapters, not to mention tons of other work she now describes as "minimal")."

"...was THREE of sixteen chapters...."

If I had written three chapters of the book, been as involved as you were, especially as publisher, I'd have those chapter numbers memorized by heart.

I do want to note those chapters in my book.

[SharonAnn]

274. I think that would be like Kerry trying to explain more to Tom DeLay

and Sen. Bill Frist and think that will solve the differences of opinion.

Just let Bev do what she does. She's made good progress and as a voter, I'm appreciative of that.

[ParanoidPat]

189. Please explain how setting a precedent for other states to follow.....

.....could in any way "harm the credibility of this issue in the slightest"? :shrug:

The link to the suit is up thread. Read it. :evilgrin:

You play the hand you're dealt. Diebold lied plain and simple. They illegally installed 'non certified' software in all 17 counties in California that use their machines. They lied about the accuracy and reliability of their voting system. There are FACTS to back up those allegations.

Are you alleging that Bev LIED about this issue in any or all of her interviews? Is there some other legal strategy that you're aware of that she's not? Please fill us in! :)

[ibegurpard]

190. I'm implying nothing of the sort

If she wins the suit, more power to her. If she loses, the issue's credibility takes a hit. As a PR person, she has to be well aware of even the APPEARANCE of impropriety, which is one reason why I thought she was opposed to the idea of a qui tam to begin with.
No one is accusing her of lying about the issue. As possibly the most visible activist out there on this issue, particularly considering her opposition to this tactic at the beginning (particularly disconcerting to be reading the accounts of others involved from the beginning who I have no reason to disbelieve)her actions carry a great deal of weight.

[Joanne98]

192. Why are you yelling at me.

I'm not a lawyer. I'm just a stupid Bev fan and I've always liked your posts. I just didn't like to hear what Bev's publisher David had to say. As far as I know Bev hasn't lied but then I don't know very much. I don't understand all the infighting between players. The issue is too important to screw up. Why don't you answer some of David's charges since your here.

[ParanoidPat]

213. Umm sorry but I wasn't addressing you let alone......

.....yelling. :( (I thought yelling meant typing in all caps?)
Look closely at the "response to" number in the upper right hand corner of my post.

[Kelvin Mace]

208. I have no problem with people

who decide to profit from their activism. Good works should be rewarded. Its not my thing, but to each his own. What I have a problem with is a person falsley accusing other people of conspiring to sabotage a movement in order to profit, while they are secretly planning on profiting themselves.

[shance]

227. I have a problem with that too David.

I hope thats not what is going on here.

[Joanne98]

187. This thread makes me sick

I don't no what to believe. I wish I hadn't been off the computer all weekend. I hate money.

[trumad]

193. OK..I gotta ask....

Why Jim March? For christ sakes, she couldn't find somebody who smells a bit better?

[Joanne98]

195. He was here in the beginning.

He got kicked off. Ask Paranoid Pat. He knows.

[trumad]

197. Oh yah...I remember him....

OK..so he gets kicked from DU for being a dipshit Libertarian who calls the members of DU Commies and now he's hooked up with a forum member who's used DU in many many ways for research, etc? Oh...and I'm supposed to embrace this fucking combo and say "You Go Girl"! Errr yah sure, ok......

I can't tell you how disappinted I am with all this. Karma's a bitch...Good Luck

[ParanoidPat]

200. Who? Do you know of anyone else who was willing to put out the effort?

This is not a partisan issue. Bev came here to solicit help from anyone who thought this was important. Jim stepped up to the plate and developed the 'hack a vote' demo CD that turned a lot of heads. He was tomb-stoned from DU for his political leanings but he persisted in this issue. He put out the effort to do something about these machines.

You play the hand you're dealt. :evilgrin:

Jim's political ideals have absolutely nothing to do with the merits of the lawsuit. Diebold's actions do. Did anyone else here step up and offer to go to Sacramento and research or file this suit?

Anyone? Anyone? :shrug:

[trumad]

202. Fine...but his blatant greed does....

If you're a schmuck you're a schmuck! Period! If you want to associate yourself with a Schmuck then some of that Schmucks gonna rub off on you. Maybe Bev (instead of agreeing with this Schmuck's assessment of us er...Liberal Commies} out to talk to Jimmy and tell him to tone down the criticism of a community that helped Bev become what she is today?


Ya Think! Oh and one more thing... Seems like some folks just want to skim by old Jimmy's slanders of David, and other activists! Oh but it's not partisan! BULLSHIT!

[Melinda]

203. Uh Yeah, I did. I LIVE IN Sacramento.

And I worked many, many hours doing legal research and gathering information for BBV from the time Bev arrived on DU and continuing thru late 2003. After her melt down of November 2004, Bev quit responding to any of my emails.

Again, from the time Bev came here, till she shut the door to me (for whatever reason) all Bev ever had to do was ask and I was there to help as much as much as I could. And that includes anything she needed done in Sacramento - except Bev had Jim March. :shrug:

[ConsAreLiars]

204. A quick summary

since this thread has a lot of noise in it. Briefly. Jim March has been an important part of the anti-BBV effort from early on and the actions taken by them and others in CA led to the discovery that Diebold could be sued (in CA) for fraud without obligating the plaintiffs to withdraw from the struggle for honest voting systems (in contrast to federal or other state suits). As I read this, Jim brought to Bev the fact that a Qui Tam in CA could be filed without giving up the fight, and they agreed to go forward. You probably recall Jim's crucial help on this project at a key juncture, and both have "standing" in terms of their qualifications as whistle blowers with specific evidence of fraud.

Because this kind of carries stiff penalties it is genuinely punitive, and it returns to the state money for alternative technology that actually fulfills the contract requirements.

Bringing the suit helps the BBV effort by drawing additional attention to the wrongdoing, and if it wins, by funding continued efforts and giving the state a chance to pursue alternatives.

The only people who would be benefited by discrediting or undermining this suit would be Diebold and the TrustMeCorp snake oil operatives generally, and those who want unverifiable voting systems.

[trumad]

206. The fucking guys Superman huh?

Like I said...he's over there dissing this fine forum with the usual dipshit Libertarian speak and Bev sits quietly by and says nothing. What about the slander directed towards certain activists here on DU...Is that OK!?

I personally don't care if this guys Mahatma Ghandi, if he spews this type of shit at folks who were a big part of BBV's success then I say he can go fuck himself. Hey Bev...How about disavowing what he's saying.... Or are you just gonna agree with his comments?

[ConsAreLiars]

209. You've made your dislike of March clear.

Go over to some site he is posting on and scream like a freeper if you want, but don't expect others to carry your water. Your demand that Bev do this for you is childish. Your implication that carrying on a spitting contest with March is more important than confronting the unauditable voting scam is absurd.

[trumad]

211. Oh it goes much deeper than that!

and don't fucking call me childish! I ain't even touching on half the shit I could touch on! Integrity! Do you even know what the fuck that is. Apparently not!

[stickdog]

228. Trumad, why don't you take the fight to March himself?

Seriously. If he's really a libertarian, he must not mind free speech.

[trumad]

239. I'm actually yelling hoping that Bev hears me!

Can you hear Bev? A whole bunch of folks love(d) the hell out of you and still do. Ya gonna let this guy trash the folks who stood by your side or are you going to ask him to keep his pie hole shut? Oh I know it's free speech, but he is your partner. If my partner or friend was bashing my other friends I'd ask him to knock it off.

[Joanne98]

198. And here's Hedda

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1979320

Just to be obnoxious.

[hedda_foil]

207. Obnoxious?

Just in case anyone was wondering, the National Ballot Integrity Project site has been under development for over a month. The launch was planned to coincide with the "Computer Ate My Vote" National Day of Action tomorrow when voting officials will be asked to sign the Pledge for Ballot Integrity. (We came first, and we had discussions underway with all the groups involved well before they named their pledge.)

I didn't post the announcement on this thread because I didn't want anyone to link the launch of our site with the reaction surrounding Bev's lawsuit. The two events are completely unrelated.

[ParanoidPat]

217. I'll second that emotion. Obnoxious?

Way to go hedda_foil! :bounce:

Time to exit this 'circular firing squad' and go DO SOMETHING! :toast:

[OKNancy]

223. About those Clinton cigars

I see up-thread that someone said that Bev just hosted the seller of the cigars. It looks like she was an active participant in the selling of these cigars. I find it rather creepy myself. This is taking one of the more sordid aspects of the Clinton saga and trying to make a profit from it.

------
Note: to get to the original web page, you have to use the wayback site.
-----------
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:talion%40ix.netcom.com&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&start=20&sa=N
------------

New Clinton cigar (already!)
Yet another assault on presidential prestige: a Renton Washington-based marketing
firm, has already begun selling THE PRESIDENTIAL CIGAR. "We selected a large-size
cigar known in the industry as an El Presidente," says owner Bev Harris. ...
alt.impeach.clinton - Sep 12, 1998 by talion - View Thread (1 article)
--------------------

Re: The President's Cigar
... PRESIDENTIAL CIGAR. "We selected a large-size cigar known in the industry
as an El Presidente," says owner Bev Harris. The five-dollar ...
talk.bizarre - Sep 12, 1998 by talion - View Thread (8 articles)

======

A Bill Clinton cigar...aready?
... CIGAR. "We selected a large-size cigar known in the industry as an
El Presidente," says Talion president Bev Harris. Talion's five ...
alt.smokers.cigars - Sep 12, 1998 by talion - View Thread (4 articles)

-------
Search Result 20
From: talion ([email protected])
Subject: Re: A Small Cigar ...
View: Complete Thread (9 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: alt.music.jethro-tull
Date: 1998/09/12


Huh -- thought you were talking about our fearless leader. But then
again, some say that was a big cigar. A marketing firm, has already
begun selling THE PRESIDENTIAL CIGAR.

"We selected a large-size cigar known in the industry as an El
Presidente," says owner Bev Harris. The five-dollar collector cigars,
which feature an official gold seal and a Billy-C image, measure an
impressive (in the cigar industry, anyway) six inches long, with a
respectable 50-ring size circumference.

More info: http://www.talion.com/cigar.htm

---------

Re: Infamous Cigar Encounter
After hearing the latest presidential gossip, a Renton Washington-based marketing
firm, has already begun selling THE PRESIDENTIAL CIGAR. "We selected a large-size
cigar known in the industry as an El Presidente," says owner Bev Harris. ...
alt.gossip.celebrities - Sep 12, 1998 by talion - View Thread (5 articles)

-----------

Re: Anyone Care For a Cigar ?
Well...someone has already found a smoking pun. A Renton Washington-based marketing
firm, has already begun selling THE PRESIDENTIAL CIGAR. "We selected a large-size
cigar known in the industry as an El Presidente," says owner Bev Harris. ...
alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys - Sep 12, 1998 by talion - View Thread (11 articles)
------------

....and many more.

[Kelvin Mace]

224. Now I am feeling ill

This explains SO much to me.

God, what a sap I have been.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[OKNancy]

225. I'm sorry

check your p.m.

[Fud]

246. Gawd David you just found out about the cigars?

We found out about it over a year ago after bev started attacking bartcoppers.After posting it here the koolaid crowd were denying it completely.And the fact she doesn't vote and isn't a democrat.

No one would of known but she pissed off so many people and they started digging and viola.Capitalizing on Monica and Clinton cigars.

Some people were defending it as though is was great that rush or o'reilly make a good living beating on Clinton.

[Kelvin Mace]

252. Yes, I fear so...

At the time that all of this hit the fan over here, I had the following things going on:

1) I was reading through the mountain of email from the Diebold file.

2) I was dealing with Bev and bbv.org web site. As you remember, that is what touched off the fire storm. While some have said that Bev's web site was taken down because she didn't pay the bill, it was, in fact taken down on a DMCA notice (I know nothing of the billing status. I was trying to make sense of differing accounts coming to me from Bev who began to accuse an ever increasing consortium of individuals with being involved in trying to "steal" the data on the web site. The ISP was kind of upset because they had fielded a number of phone calls from Bev replete with warnings and threats of legal action. When you mention the word "sue" to a business, the business gets *very* cautious. I called the tech support manager and got him to allow me to back up the files on the site. A week later, I was able to talk with the company lawyer who explained that the site could be turned on immediately, if I simply removed the links Diebold was objecting to. This took me about ten minutes to accomplish, and the site was restored at once.

In essence the site was off-line for about two weeks, when it probably could have been back up in a day if Bev hadn't muddied the waters with her accusations, demands and threats.

3) With bbv.org down, I was trying to shift the news functions over to bbv.com. During this time I had to deal with my ISP (a different character) who shut us down twice over bogus spam complaints. I then relocated the site to a more helpful ISP.

4) The uproar that Diebold started with C&D shutdowns and Bev's mass mailing about her site being taken down resulted in a torrent of phone calls to my office. Reporters and activists wanted information and, Bev was often hard to get hold of.

5) About this time also, "Vanity Faire" contacted me to let me know they were lining up Gore Vidal to do a BBV story and could they see an advance copy of the book (at this point, I think about 8-9 chapters were done). I spoke to Bev about how soon we could complete the book. She promised me it would be finished by Oct 15th. I then pleaded with her to stick to working on the book and stay off DU and the fury that she had stirred up with DemActivist. She promised to do this, but got on, jumped into the fray and got herself kicked off.

6) While speaking to various folks who wanted to help (BartCop and the EFF come to mind) Bev managed to alienate these groups, accusing them of the previously mentioned 'qui tam" nonsense.

7) You may recall I used to submit a lot of stuff to BartCop from my own web site, thoughtcrimes.org, at this point I had to cut back in order to stay abreast of BBV activities.

8) I went on the John Gibson Show (the first time Bev referred to me as her co-author) and got rave reviews from Bev for how I handled the situation.

9) I flew to Colorado for another TV appearance.

10) I fielded a number of interviews for Bev, or arranged them for her.

11) I started working with William Gazecki who was making a documentary, "Invisible Ballots". (Get this video. In it, Bev actually credits me with things she now wouldn't be caught dead admitting to in an interview)

12) Occasionally, I got home to sleep and see my wife.

In early November, my wife (who suffers from MS) had a bad fall and required extensive dental repair and stitches, which further distracted me.

During this time, a call from Bev could be cordial or blisteringly abusive. At the start of a call I could be a hero, but a complete villain by the end.

By December, all I wanted to do was finish the book and get away. However Bev continued to drag her feet, making changes, demands and threats all the way into the end of January 2004.

In March, her lawyer wrote me demanding I surrender all rights to the book due to "breach of contract".

So, in summary, yes, I missed the cigar story. <s>

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[Kelvin Mace]

259. On follow up, a few points I need to clarify

As I said, when the whole issue of bbv.org being taken down arose, lots of things were going on at the same time. So, it took me some time to get to the bottom of all the claims and accusations that Bev was making.

In the end, I was sure of a couple of things:

1) No one seized or impounded bbv.org. The most charitable thing I can say about Bev's claims is they were the product severe stress and her fundamental misunderstanding of how web sites work. Bev Conover, DemActivist, Eloriel, BartCop, Fud were in no way guilty of anything Bev accused them of. Nothing in the access logs supported Bev's charges and this should be obvious since Bev never mentioned the logs again after she regained control of the site.

2) The blackboxvoting.org site could have been back on-line the day after it was taken down if Bev had calmly dealt with the matter.

David

[Zomby Woof]

260. thank you

All of your posts confirm my long-held deepest suspicions about the entire Cult of BBV.

[Kelvin Mace]

261. Well, to be fair,

I could be called part of that "cult". We are liberals, we like to believe the best of people until they kick our teeth. <s>

Unlike the DLC though, you only get to do that once with this crowd.

D.

[hunter]

267. There's plenty going on outside the "cult..."

Unless Kerry wins by a landslide, the wreckage left by these machines after November's election will be awful.

[truthspeaker]

290. then you're misreading them. He was talking about the actions of

a few individuals, not the merits of the issue itself.

[yowzayowzayowza]

265. I believe March is still supporting...

Bev's accusation over on that THR thread, tho backing off from the evidence:

David Allen is Bev's original book publisher. He has severely ripped her off - I've seen the financial statements.

A number of other people denied Bev access to her own website for months. It's a long bloody story but there was definately fraud and theft of materials committed against her. The ONLY thing that makes sense is that there was an attempt to slow her down by people doing Qui Tams. Bev basically has more Qui Tam standing than *anybody*, myself included. Bev has strong suspicions as to which people were involved. I'm not going to comment on that because I don't have access to her server logs and the like.

"The ONLY thing that makes sense" ... now that is some strong evidence!!!

[yowzayowzayowza]

229. Hmmmm....

Talion.com is now unreachable....

[OKNancy]

230. Archive

http://web.archive.org/web/19991112034903/http://www.talion.com/cigar.htm

http://web.archive.org/web/19990222150235/http://www.talion.com/cigar.htm

[yowzayowzayowza]

231. Don't see anything else remotely...

political on the site:

http://web.archive.org/web/20000413000915/www.talion.com/index.html

http://web.archive.org/web/20000413000915/www.talion.com/

...except:

- Activists and nonprofit groups - until now, real PR campaigns were out of reach for most nonprofits.

which is mostly the same kinda stuff I saw last time I checked it out.

[Selwynn]

233. Who gives a fuck what the motives are - any attention to e-voting is good!

I really couldn't care less who/what/where/when or how the issues surrounding black box voting get raised. I don't care if everyone who rasies the issues is perfect, I don't care about all the behind the scenes soap opera bullshit. I don't care.

All I care about is that electronic voting and all of this scandal and problem continues to get more and more attention and face more and more opposition in any way shape or form.

Maybe if we spent a little more time keeping our eye on the goddamn prize and a little less time bitching and fighting amoungst ourselves the country wouldn't be in the shape it is today.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

236. On the other hand, maybe if people stopped laying down when they got

screwed.

I don't fault Bev for filing the suite...I don't fault AP for the points he made..but I DO recall the thread that others have mentioned where they were called out and I think it a bit arrogant to suggest that out of all the people that contributed to this work, Bev is the only one that had the gumption to take it and run with it.

Certainly AP knows that those who were wronged and who did contribute have legal recourse of their own in the matter of what was said and commitments that were made previously. I would suggest those people contact their own legal representation. They clearly have cause.

[Kelvin Mace]

238. Thank you!

It is getting a bit much to stomach that I and others "take one for the team".

[Selwynn]

243. Why?

Don't the needs of the many out way the needs of the one?

In other words, isn't it better that this happens reguarless of who did it and what their motives were for the benefit of the nation, wich is more important than the hurt you personally experienced by her hands?

Maybe I don't understand the suit enough - maybe it really ISN'T helpful. Maybe it doesn't represent a signigicant step in the right direction. I'm not a lawyer, maybe it is just a meaningless publicity stunt.

All I know is that if it is something that can bring real pressure on deibold and real national attention to electronic voting then I think that is almost worth just about any price.

And I do mean that with all due respect, not as combative as I sounde last night at 4am.

Sel

[Kelvin Mace]

249. Not always

In other words, isn't it better that this happens reguarless of who did it and what their motives were for the benefit of the nation, wich is more important than the hurt you personally experienced by her hands?

First, this is an ongoing thing. This is not just something did in the past, it is a campaign she's waging now.

Second, awfully nice of you to decide that I and others are an acceptable loss. Generally though, I like to volunteer for these things, not be assigned.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[Selwynn]

251. I wasn't deciding....

I was asking you if you agreed with the sentiment.

My question remains: isn't it better that this happens reguarless of who did it and what their motives were for the benefit of the nation, wich is more important than the hurt you personally experienced by her hands?

And your answer is apparently, no it's not.

[Selwynn]

241. Let's be clear here:

I'm not claiming anything other than I think any attention brought to electronic voting is good, and in theory I'm all for it. To me that's more important then who was right and who was wronged. I thinkg you're refering to that other thread (which I missed) when you talk about the arrogance of suggesting Bev is the only one with the gumption to run with it. But in case you think that's what I'm saying, I'm not. I'm saying that its more important that pressure be put on diebold and that the electronic voting fiasco be drawn into maintream and public attention, and I'm willing to use angels *and* devils in pursuing that vein.

To me, I believe anything that contributes to stopping deibold is worth the price of a few egos, opportunities, or persons with separate agendas. And yes, I still feel that if we spent a little more time with our eye on the prize and a little less time on the character and motives of the goal seekers, we'd be in a better place. But hey, maybe I'm way off base there.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

244. I think it's a really great cause and don't negate the good done

I haven't seen a single person withdraw their support from the BBV issue...but I was here for EVERY step of this including back when BBV was a conversation and DU'ers were doing research, giving it willingly, spending time investigating and being duped into writing the book for her...even THEN people had to pull teeth to get her to admit the info was going into a book.

It is pure conjecture for anyone to suggest she was the only person capable of making it happen....that said...I am glad she has accomplished what she accomplished and I hope she wins the suit...one wonders what cooperation she may need in the future, however, that some of the more astute people (who do feel burned) gave her, that the people high-fiving this level of integrity can't give...for instance:

PlanPub 9
and AmericanStranger were producing results before Bev came along

Roxanne was producing results before Bev came along
Melinda was an attorney before Bev came along

This whole thing is getting recontextualized as though it is just, right, and efficient to swindle people every step of the way to do good....I don't buy that.

I think some very effective partners will be gun shy in the future...and that is a shame...but they have just cause to be weary now. DOn't shit where you eat....remember that line from Moonstruck?

[Selwynn]

247. Sounds like I'm just coming in on the end and not appreciating the big..

..picture.

[Kelvin Mace]

250. You touch on a important point...

While I will see this movement through to the end, I will NEVER, EVER get involved in any activism in the future. I will NEVER publish another book of an activist/political nature. I don't care if it includes signed confessions from every member of BushCo and a picture of George W killing puppies with a hammer.

Aside from the fact that I never want this kind of grief ever again, I can't afford to be the "one" who according to Sel, "the needs of the many outweigh" and would i please hurry and put my head on the chopping block of the next person's ego.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[Pobeka]

254. The needs of the many, indeed!

David,

Your efforts are deeply appreciated. I wanted to stay out of this discussion (over many months), because I have thought that it dragged down the BBV effort, but I can't remain silent.

Bev is the one dragging down the effort. It needs to be said. This is more than a little sniping going on at a forum. Some of the credibility about what Bev says about the BBV issue in a larger picture than just Bev is now in jeopardy, because Bev's crediblity has very publically dropped to zero.

If Bev had said up front she wanted to make some money in a lawsuit, that would have been fine with me. But no. The only public comments she made were qui tam's would hurt the effort.

Now it's quite clear she was building her own qui tam case at the same time.

If she can't be straight with those working with her, then how far will she stretch the truth about BBV in order to make a little more money from the BBV issue?

Believe me, it's not me thinking that thought that worries me, it's the judges and juries who will ultimately weigh in on this, and who will have to raise some eyebrows knowing what we know about Bev's lack of credibility.

On top of that, we now have the Bush administration trying to find legal ways to delay the elections in case of "terrorism". I remember Florida 2000, and a key legal argument was there was no longer time to do a recount. Touch screens unreliable? Too late, we can't do a recount anyway, not enough time...

The one who needs to bow to the needs of the many is Bev, not the volunteers on the BBV project, whose sum total effort is what made the thing possible. If Bev had an ounce of integrity, she would have already made a public apology, and announced the proceeds from the lawsuit will go to fund the various BBV organizations. Her silence on the apology front has been deafening.

I hope you understand that many, many of us appreciate the good work you did, and appreciate it even more now knowing the personal hell that Bev gave you.

[Kelvin Mace]

255. Thank you for your kind words

As I said, I will stay in this fight to the end, Bev not withstanding.

David

[Cookie wookie]

270. David, I've watched what was happening with you from afar

and admire the way you've handled it with dignity and honor.

Harris has hurt many, many people and the movement. But it's still painful to see so many of those hurt are like you, people who gave generously of their time and talents and even financially and were ill used.

But after all, the cause is the only thing that mattered.

Everything you gave went for the cause, after all, no matter how great her misuse has been and still is.

Although we haven't won the war on electronic vote stealing machines, we have gained ground, and we will eventually win or Democracy will be lost in the process.

Without all the brilliant people to feed her information, I doubt she can get far, whether with this lawsuit or any other. There are a couple of real whistleblowers who might stand a chance, but one of them I know doesn't want to sue. So what may seem like the lottery of all times will probably end up for her and March like the lottery tickets I buy every payday, in the trash. Oh well. I don't see it hurting the movement, except it might garner negative publicity. The folks at the Electronic Freedom Foundation warned me that if we filed any kind of suit in Ga (and at no time did anyone I was involved with ever ever consider Qui Tam!!), we'd better make sure we had all our ducks in a row and the best representation we could get so we wouldn't lose and set a bad precedent.

I'm sorry you are still having to wrangle with her. Hang tough and keep the faith. You're inspiring.

[Kelvin Mace]

277. We have come very far

in the last year. I am quite proud of what we have accomplished.

I find it amusing that one of Bev's comments was about how we need money to fight our well-financed opponents. Actually, despite their money, we have been giving them a serious ass-kicking.

EFF brings up a very good point about the law suit. Several attorneys I spoke to say Bev has no standing in California and will be removed from the case, leaving Jim March.

Which makes me wonder that if March did win, would he share the spoils with Bev and her foundation?

[blm]

269. VERY well stated, Pobeka.

David Allen has been meticulously honest. I know because my spouse has published a book with David and he bends over backwards to be fair.

David believed so much in the BBV issue that he put most of his other business on hold while he devoted his efforts to research and pull Bev through on the project as she required a great deal of help. The rest of his roster understood and accepted that the BBV book would take precedent over all their projects.

To put it in a way that would be easily understood here, David is like the Dennis Kucinich of publishing. He never cared about money, his concern has always been for justice and democracy.

[Cookie wookie]

271. For folks who may have concerns that if Harris' credibility is hurt,

that may mean that what she was saying about bbv was wrong, the answer is a resounding Nope.

The arguments against paperless, touchscreen voting systems as the systems are presently configured, are valid and sound. There is a veritible rock solid case against this kind of voting system, that's been built for the most part brick by brick over the past 18 or so months by a group of people, some of whom have participated here at various times and have been mentioned in this thread.

[Pobeka]

273. Have you been paying attention during the last 4 years?

Just wondering if you forgot about the RW spin machine that can now focus on Harris' credibility, and taint the BBV issue with that spin in the uneducated voter's mind. Faux News, CNN can make people dizzy with this, and we'll never know what happened to the real concern about electronic voting, because it's the media that gets to tell the masses what issues to think about, not the other way around.

And the painful irony is that the selfless workers for this cause are going to have to work even harder because of this fiasco.

Just call it an experienced hunch -- I do hope I'm wrong, for the sake of democracy.

[Kelvin Mace]

278. Agreed

The evidence to date against the machines is pretty damning. The only thing that doesn't hold up (because their is no solid evidence) is Bev's grand conspiracy theory.

[ParanoidPat]

276. Hmmm, Bev was out addressing a group tonight after doing a .....

press gig in Austin, everyone else was sitting at home bitching. Tell us again how Bev was "dragging down the effort" while she's the one out there in Texas doing something while you all sit at home and bitch? :shrug:

The mind boggles. :crazy:

Who was it that searched and found the Diebold software to begin with?
Who was it that received the Diebold memos and made them public?
Who's servers were shut down due to DMCA complaints?
Who lost their research when the server was shut down?
Who has been dealing with the Secret Service over this issue?

Give it a fucking break.

[Kelvin Mace]

280. Pat, sorry to bust your bubble...

press gig in Austin, everyone else was sitting at home bitching. Tell us again how Bev was "dragging down the effort" while she's the one out there in Texas doing something while you all sit at home and bitch? :shrug:

I was in Raleigh yesterday as part of the same nationwide rally Bev was:

http://vevo.verifiedvoting.org/verifier/map.php?state=North%20Carolina

I gave a talk with Sen Kinaird and Rep. Insko who have introduced a moratorium bill in the NC General Assembly on the purchase of BBV's (which I was asked to advise on) and to appoint a panel to address the question of VVPB.

I have also spoken before the John Locke Foundation and the Patrick Henry Society.

I am quite capable, as are MANY people here, of thinking and acting without Bev's "guidance".

This is not "The Bev Harris Show(tm)" (All rights reserved)

Who was it that searched and found the Diebold software to begin with?

Please read Bev's own words. She did indeed find the site (while pursuing a line of inquiry I suggested), but had to call me to ask what she had found. She did not understand what the site was until I explained it to her. She has good luck and good instincts, but she still had to ask someone else what she had found.

Who was it that received the Diebold memos and made them public?

That would be me.

Watch "Invisible Ballots" and hear Bev herself explain that the memos were sent to me. Now, here is the really funny part. Bev was DEAD SET AGAINST me getting and reading the memos. She was CONVINCED is was a "Diebold honey trap" designed to discredit her. When she found out I was going to get the memos, she threatened to call her lawyer to break the contract to disassociate herself from me in order to "protect herself". She even accused ME of hacking Diebold for the memos (a compliment, since I am not a hacker of that caliber, but then, maybe not, Diebold wasn't exactly Fort Knox).

Bev did publicize them, but indirectly. She leaked them to others who had the guts to post them. If you recall she only linked to such sites.

So, to be clear, I didn't publicize them, but I did accept them from the leaker, incurring Bev's wrath and abuse at the time. When she realized that they had also been leaked to a Wired! reporter who might publicize them, she beat them to the punch by leaking them to the folks who posted them.

Who's servers were shut down due to DMCA complaints?

I addressed this issue earlier. If Bev had not gone off on wild conspiratorial tangents, the server would have been down ONE DAY.

Who lost their research when the server was shut down?

Bev "lost" nothing. Nothing was impounded, or copied as far as I could see from the logs. As Bev has the logs, she can provide proof to the contrary if disagrees. Again, total hyperbole.

Who has been dealing with the Secret Service over this issue?

Well now, I can't address this one. But since Bev won't give "Agent Mike's" last name, I have a lot of questions about that.

The above doesn't in any way detract from Bev's efforts, but it does show that Bev's attempt to portray my efforts as "minor" is simply not true. Her denigration of my work (and completely ignore others)has been part of her campaign to claim sole credit for this movement.

Don't beleive me? Go read the AP profile Rachel Konrad wrote.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/2004-07-06-bevharris-profile_x.htm

Anybody want to dissect the inaccuracies in that article?

I invite those of you who provided assistance with other parts of the book to speak up as well.

[hunter]

283. Kick.

Just because.

[ParanoidPat]

284. "The more you stir shit, the more it stinks." .....

.....or so used to say my friend Stephen's grandmother. :)

But even a big steaming pile of shit, when turned in a timely manner, will eventually break down under exposure to air and sunlight and become fertilizer.

What one chooses to grow with it is up to them. :evilgrin:

You can take an activist out of the fight, but you can't take the fight out of an activist!

[Pobeka]

285. Bev wouldn't be doing a gig if it wasn't for Dave et. al.

... she'd be sitting around wondering what an ftp site was. For crying out loud last fall she didn't even understand the concept of who owns a website.

She would not be where she is now without the efforts of many, many volunteers. And she lied to them about how she intended to use the fruits of their generous labor. Then she not merely cast aside, but publicly insulted, caused personal and financial harm to them in the process.

That's the point here. Giving credit where credit is due. So, no, I won't "give it a fucking break", because there are people who did and still are truly make personal sacrifices who deserve recognition, and some justice to be served by the truth being told.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

256. The biggest crime would be for you to make that decision and hold to it.

In the future, make sure you have a contractual agreement in anything you do with others...handshakes are only as good as the sweat on your palm in the real world.

Next time, let the idealism drive your vision and practicality drive your actions.
Get it in writing...get airtight contracts...and press your point and negotiate every step of the way.

The learning experience is that some people are predatory and dishonest and will suck you dry no matter the "good intentions" ... trust is for intimate relationships...contracts are for business arrangements....consider that the learning experience and keep busting your ass for a better world as though it's entirely up to you.

It is.

[Kelvin Mace]

263. Actually, there is a contract

I was just spoiled by my dealings with cartoonists.

I bend over backwards to be fair. This is the first time anyone ever took advantage of desire to give people a fair deal.

Sadly, now I have to create those nasty 30 page monstrosities and pay some damn lawyer to draw it up.

*&$%$#^#*&

D.

[Joanne98]

264. Now you sound like Joe Trippi

Not trying to be smart, just trying to cheer you up. Hang in there :)

[MissB]

293. David, out of all of this

What you just wrote is the saddest result.

[Eloriel]

268. Well, then, hell

YOU get in there and take the abuse. And then we can tell YOU to just shut the fuck up and take it (again and again and again), because the "cause" is so much more important than being victimized by people (purportedly) on your own side.

On another of your points, I have no idea if Bev's suit is a GOOD thing "for the cause" or not. Time will tell, n'est ce pas? But that hasn't been the sticking point for most of us (TFHP notwithstanding, of course). It was the hypocrisy inherent in wrongly accusing a whole bunch of people, some of them heavy hitting men and women of considerable accomplishment, of doing what she herself was in the process, or very, very soon to BE in the process, of doing herself (i.e., filing a qui tam suit).

To this day, I know of NO apologies that have YET been offered to any of those wrongly accused. David has written about his own chamber of horrors which continues, apparently, to this day. At the very least, a PR-savvy approach to this whole thing would have been to quietly contact those she had maligned and let them know what was going on and why, along with said apology, before she issued her public announcement.

And maybe you're missing another point here. It's NOT just that she accused people of doing things we were not, things that were mostly considered lacking in integrity and damaging to "the cause," it's ALSO that inherent in those accusations and her refusal to accept denials, was the implied charge of lack of integrity AND disingenuousness (i.e., LYING about it to boot).

Speaking for myself alone, I could've passed the accusation off as nothing, really, or unimportant, had it not been made publicly and had she not pressed the case and pressed the case, refusing to accept in ANY way my denials (or the denials of others). That made me look like she was calling me a liar, tho she never HAD to say that. And because of HER high profile and star status at DU, she garnered the sympathy and credibility on the issue. It still steams me (obviously). As I said, it was a VERY hurtful thing for me.

And you're suggesting I should have continued to WORK with a person who did that? Ugh. Ugh, ugh, ugh. As I said, step right up and take your rightful place being a martyr to "the cause." As for me, I expect at least a modicum of respectful treatment from people I deal with, and that would include at least an apology for slandering me -- I won't even ber a hard ass and insist on no spurrious accusations to start with.

And it's not as if Bev's work is the only game in town, either, so breaking with her doesn't prevent someone from working on the issue otherwise.

[Kelvin Mace]

237. Easy for you to say

you are not the one being attacked.

Those of us who have to pay a lawyer to defend ourselves from vicious libels have a slighty different take on the matter.

I have not taken my eye from "the prize". I will be at the NC rally today,

[Selwynn]

242. I'm sorry

I did not realize this was anything more than some accusations on forums that really didn't matter or mean anything.

The only thing I've ever heard is that Bev accused a lot of other people of false movties and of filing an "opportunistic suit" when no one ever had, only to turn around and file one herself later.

I didn't see anything in that which would result in someone having to hire a lawyer. All I saw in that was someone saying some wrong things and having a personal agenda, but still in the end bringing greater pressur to bear on diebold and greater attention to the problem.

I apologize if I am underfamiliar with the facts. All I care about is stopping "black box" voting - and any one or anything that helps that I'm for, reguarless of who's feelings get hurt along the way. But perhaps this is more than that.

[Fud]

248. I think we all want that

To decertify electronic voting.Maryland did because they didn't trust it at all.There are some that defend it saying there are too many votes to count which is bogus.Canada can count their votes in one night.And those that say it's not possible here are idiots you just hire more counters per capita...plain and simple.Other countrys can do it and so can we.

As far as bev goes she has pissed off and lied about so many people no wonder people are angry.

Have a Clinton cigar.

[Kelvin Mace]

253. And I apologize for being a bit rough.

I need to remember that some people are new to all this. Thanks for the apology and consider it accepted.

I too want is to see these machines stopped and will see it through to the end, Bev or no Bev. <s>

With that said, I really wish it had never happened. Bev did do a lot of work. Trouble is, as she garnered fame, she forgot she didn't do it alone, not by a long shot.

David Allen
Publisher, CEO, Janitor
Plan Nine Publishing
http://www.plan9.org
http://www.blackboxvoting.com

[nomatrix]

282. Isn't all the research done by everyone based

on the original findings done by Rebecca Meccuri, Ph.D ?

http://www.notablesoftware.com/evote.html#RMPapers

I don't hear her name mentioned in BBV threads, I do hear David Dill and others of similar backgrounds.

I remember her speaking out back in the 2000 election. This is not to downplay anything being discussed in this thread. I just thought it might need to be mentioned in regard to credibility, as far as the lawsuit.

[GAspnes]

287. I didn't base any of my analyses on Dr. Mercuri's work

I just spent 4 months crawling through code, setting up a voting machine environment and stepping through it line by line.

My work was just a tiny part of the contribution, certainly not as aggravating or challenging as David's.

Much of Dr. Mercuri's work was theoretical (which doesn't make it any less valuable). My contribution was to show that the theory worked in practice.

[nomatrix]

288. I think you'll find her work is more than theoretical

From the link
"Who created the Voter Verified Balloting concept?

Rebecca Mercuri did. She first described it in her paper: "Physical Verifiability of Computer Systems" presented at the 5th International Computer Virus and Security Conference in March 1992, and the concept also appeared in her Doctoral Dissertation, defended October 27, 2000. She coined the phrase in her comment: "Explanation of Voter-Verified Ballot Systems" in The Risks Digest, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, Volume 22, Issue 17, July 24, 2002, and an artist's rendering of a "Mercuri Method" voting system (they need not be so elaborate) appeared in her October 2002 IEEE Spectrum article, "A Better Ballot Box."This design concept was deliberately never patented by Dr. Mercuri so that it could be freely incorporated into election systems."


"1. Brief Bio: Dr. Rebecca Mercuri has been referred to as "the leading
independent expert on electronic voting technology." Shortly before the
2000 Presidential election, Rebecca defended her Ph.D. dissertation on
the subject of "Electronic Vote Tabulation: Checks and Balances" at the
Engineering School of the University of Pennsylvania. Days later she was
center-stage in the Florida controversy, providing testimony cited in briefs
to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the months that followed, Dr. Mercuri was
called to Capitol Hill to testify before the House Science Committee regarding
voting technology standards. Her opinions were directly reflected in the
Help America Vote Act bill. In 2002 she was contacted by Janet Reno
and her legal team to help solve the mystery of the thousands of votes that
vanished from the new touch-screen machines being used in Miami-Dade
and Broward Counties. The "Mercuri Method" voter-verified balloting system
she first described in the 1990's is mandated now by Brazil and is being
considered for adoption in California. As President and Chief Technical
Officer of Notable Software, Inc., a Princeton-area computer firm, Rebecca
has consulted for government agencies and corporations including Intel,
the Federal Aviation Administration, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange,
Sarnoff Corporation, and the New Jersey Public Defender's Office.
Rebecca authors the "Security Watch" column for the Communications
of the Association for Computing Machinery and maintains an informative
website on electronic elections."

[GAspnes]

289. correct, so far as it goes

Dr. Mercuri proposed a system for verified voting but did not build a working model, nor did she propose or investigate flaws in specific systems. Hence, 'theoretical'.

[TruthIsAll]

272. Bev: This Prob. analysis will determine if Diebold cheats on Nov. 2...

I have scanned the thread here. I am ONLY interested in getting that P***k out of office on Nov. 2.

I remember way back when I first posted on this problem.

How far we have come, for both good and ill - mostly good.

This is a tool which should prove to be very useful as we try to understand the significance of the onslaught of polls, in light of the very real BBV threat.

Past IS prologue.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1987371

[Zhade]

291. Well, now I don't know WHAT to believe.

I was one of the first people to get smacked down by Diebold for posting files online (I mirrored files that Jim March had posted). I was threatened with a lawsuit and the files were yanked by my ISP. My screen name appears in the book.

At some point recently, it was alleged by Bev that the Kerry camp didn't want to oppose DRE machines in counties with punch card ballots. I asked her about it, and invited her to PM me with info if she didn't want to discuss it in the open. Here's what she said:



Those in the trusted circle
From: BevHarris
Date: May 21st 2004

are those who did not break away into a separate faction when my web site was shut down, which happened due to Cindy Cohn's interference and Roxanne Jekot's cooperation. Somehow I never heard from you again after the split -- and the amount of interference from certain members of the breakaway group caused so many problems for me that I do not impart trusted information to anyone who may have cooperated with that.

You name, including your real name ({REDACTED}? Something like that) was used in a correspondence which seemed to be for no other purpose than to defend a position to assert origination over original publication of the Diebold memos. The only reason to get in a pissing war over that is when one party needs "origination status" for a Qui Tam.

I'm just a little gun shy after that whole experience. Hope you'll forgive me. Most people have no idea about the actual extent of interference, and attempted shut down (and shut up) actions against my organization last fall, and how much those actions hurt, personally and professionally. I was sitting there wrapped in an electric blanket typesetting my own book (because Plan Nine didn't!), unable to afford heat, with my web site shut down and my email diverted to someone named "Jeffrey Whitlow" while a contingent of people whom I had trusted started calling me a nut, a paranoid, and a conspiracy person who had "damaged the credibility of the movement." The people who showed integrity and compassion were Andy Stephenson, Jim March, RedEagle, HarmonyGuy, and several others to whom I will always be grateful.

Those who helped shut down Black Box Voting to do whatever the hell they were doing -- even if it was Qui Tam -- crossed the line. That become tortious interference. It's one thing to go after a bounty. But there are ethics - and a sense of decency -- that fell by the wayside here.

Outside of that one use of your name, and your absence among the activists who have continued to do research for and fight the fight along with Black Box Voting, I have no problem with you. It's just that I learned the hard way not to be so trusting.

Bev



Naturally, I had no clue what the hell she was talking about, and wanted to know who used my legal name (she was correct, it was my legal name) to further what I saw as a betrayal to the anti-BBV movement. I was rightfully pissed - were her allegations true, this would have meant that my name was being used to destroy something I had taken a risk to help fight against.

So, I wrote back to her:



You know, as I was driving to work, it hit me - how did these people even GET my legal name?

I'm extremely angry about all this - it's my reputation on the line, and my name being used to apparently subvert (and/or profit from the subversion of) clean voting, and this infuriates me.

I want to know who used my name. Where can I find info on where my name appears?

I am so angry I can hardly type. I'm not just angry about my name, I'm angry about the whole thing. How could people prefer money over honest elections? Don't they realize they're digging their own graves???

Sorry to rant, but this is all new to me. I want answers from these people, and I want them NOW.



Her response (and I'm posting this only because I never received a reply from Bev, and now I read this thread):



Sorry it took so long to reply.
From: BevHarris
Date: May 24th 2004

Well, that's what I was wondering. I didn't even know your real name. However, I can tell you who did, and how I found out:

When people signed up for the forum on BlackBoxVoting.org, just like on DU, they put their real name and email in. Now, last fall, I didn't even know how to find that information. Roxanne was my webmaster, and she did all the webmaster stuff, and I didn't know how names and so forth were stored. Then my site was shut down (thanks, EFF) and I couldn't even access my FTP server to get at my own files. It was shut down for 30 days. Finally, after (in absolute frustration) I aired this problem in public, Roxanne admitted that she'd taken copies of everything and that she'd sent them to David Allen of Plan Nine. Within days I got my files back and my site back up.

I had been reading about the Diebold Memos. It was getting really annoying, because the EFF press info would always say "no one knew" who published the memos first. Of course, I did, and that is the whole reason my site was shut down. So finally I decided, enough is enough. They must be doing this for Qui Tam reasons, I thought. If they filed for a bounty on a sealed fraudulent claims (Qui Tam) case, and they wanted to knock me out so as not to distribute any of the bounty money to me, they'd have to eliminate my origination of the Diebold memos.

It just pissed me off. It wasn't about getting money, it was about the whole thing -- losing the web site, and a litany of problems. I decided to write a formal notice to the EFF and all the various computer scientists they work with to straighten out origination of the memos.

Then I got a letter back -- this is one of my favorite people, Dr. Doug Jones, actually, and I was surprised that he was the one who wrote me. I still like him a lot, and hope you don't take out after him. Dr. Jones took issue with my contention that it was blackboxvoting.org that first published the memos, and said that Jim March had done so and then than {REDACTED} had done so. I thought, "who the heck is {REDACTED}?"

Then I realized -- Jim March had gotten a cease and desist, but it wasn't for the memos, it was for the rig-a-vote files. And I tried to think who else had gotten cease and desists for the rig-a-vote thing. I came up with Trogl and Zhade. So about this time I got my files back and my web site back and I went hunting around to find the sign-up information. Sure enough, there it was, Zhade -- {REDACTED}.

Now, the only one I can think of who could have distributed that information is Roxanne. When my site was shut down, she partnered up with EFF apparently, and she seems to have taken the membership files, though she had no right to them. The other person who had those files was David Allen.

I, too, am pissed off -- and curious -- as to how your name got into other people's hands. And why would Dr. Jones have kept a log of who got cease and desists anyway?

If Roxanne passed the membership information around -- and I know for a fact that she gave the membership information of the Diebold leaker to a reporter, which is an absolutely horrific breach of protected source status -- well, now you know why there is no love lost between us. If she did it as part of preparation for a lawsuit to collect a bounty -- they would have been indexing who got cease and desists to identify who has "origination" rights, a legal term for Qui Tam -- well that would be pretty bad.

But I have no proof, just these very disquieting situations like someone passing your name around. I'm so sorry.

And now you know why I'm particularly incensed about the bogus VoteHere hack/ attempted entrapment. There is inside information on that -- and I'm under a gag order -- but let's put it this way: VoteHere CEO made some statements to the media. He COULD NOT have known the information he did unless someone leaked him the Diebold Memo leaker's email, and the only people who had that were Roxanne and David Allen. And me. Very, very disturbing. And also, in this case, evidence that Adler knew way too much -- and was probably involved in his own so-called "hack."

Wish Agent Mike could see that as clearly as I do.

{More here about the Kerry situation that Bev stated was told to her in confidence, and thus I will not divulge that information at this time.}



So, uh - what the fuck is going on? We took risks, worked hard (and while my part was tiny, it was more than doing nothing), and now I learn that BEV filed a Qui Tam after destroying others' credibility by accusing them of doing what she herself was doing at the time?

Bev owes everyone an explanation and some apologies. I'm not talking about me - it seems pretty clear that she realized I had zero to do with her allegations of others filing a Qui Tam (I STILL want to know who used my name, if it truly WAS used) - but to those she accused of doing what she herself did.

Needless to say, I feel I can no longer trust Bev at all. Sad, considering I once offered to protect her with my life.

So, Bev - what's the deal? Did you know, way back when, that people could have filed a Qui Tam case without evidence being sealed? Did people get played for fools? Or is there a reasonable explanation that you can back up with proof that you didn't scam us?

I'm pretty pissed off after reading this entire thread, and I believe you owe people some kind of explanation.

[yowzayowzayowza]

292. Hazeus R Crisco...

My brain just esploded. I may have to wait for the paperback edition.

On edit: The edition with the extrie appendix and personnel charts.

[Kelvin Mace]

295. Don't forget the flow charts

Lots and lots of flow charts!

[yowzayowzayowza]

296. Gantt too.

My o my.

[Kelvin Mace]

294. Let me make one thing quite plain

I never gave files to ANYONE other than Bev. This email of hers is so full of paranoia about people working against us, it stuns the senses.

1) No one, other than Bev, was filing a qui tam lawsuit. All of the people accused by Bev have continued to be involved in efforts to stop BBV, something they could not do if they filed a federal 'qui tam'. There could have been state suits like the one Bev pulled, but they would have come to light by now.

2) In an email a few months back, Bev accused me of taking money to "delay"

Should it become necessary to take you to court, which I am prepared to do forthwith, I will subpeona all of your banking records, and those of your spouse, to determine whether you took a payoff in exchange for impeding the distribution of this book. We will especially look at the months of October, November, and December. Perhaps all you did was cheat and behave ineptly. No matter what the answer, your contract will certainly be revoked, with past due amounts and damages awarded to me.

Now we have some clown who appears after Bev suffers major damage from her own lies claiming that someone in BBV was paid off.

Yes, I smell a major smear in the offing.

[Zhade]

297. David: I believe you.

However, I am confused by this comment (it may just be that I've only been awake for about 1.5 hours):

Now we have some clown who appears after Bev suffers major damage from her own lies claiming that someone in BBV was paid off.

What does this mean, exactly?

And where is Bev?

[Kelvin Mace]

298. I was referring to this post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1993788&mesg_id=2008647&page=

Read it and the post underneath.

[Zhade]

299. Okay.

I have no idea of the veracity of the guy's claims, of course, so I won't jump the gun.

God knows, I hope he's just a Diebold agent or something. I hope there's nothing to what he's saying.

Guess we'll find out at some point...

[Kelvin Mace]

300. It's either

a Diebold employee taking advantage of the dustup or one of Bev's cronies getting ready to launch another attack against her critics.