Is stealing 7 million votes an impeachable offense?

[glengarry]

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQResponse.htm#TrueVoteModel

The True Vote Model

The model encapsulates mathematical arguments which strongly suggest that Kerry easily won the 2004 election. The base case assumes the 12:22am National Exit Poll (NEP) vote shares. The 2000 recorded vote, mortality rate and 2000 voter turnout in 2004 are used to determine mathematically feasible (and plausible) weights.

You can download it from here. You need Excel. I found it to be a great learning tool and easy to use. But I couldn't come up with one plausible Bush win scenario in trying to satisfy the TIA challenge.
http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/KerryTrueVote.zip

The model determined that 2.6mm (3.9%) of total votes cast for Kerry were uncounted and that 4.5mm (6.8%) votes were switched to Bush. Adding the 7.1mm votes to Kerry’s 59.0mm recorded vote, he won a 66.1–58.4mm landslide with a 336-202 electoral vote margin. A powerful sensitivity analysis displays the effects of changes in input assumptions on Kerry’s national vote for hundreds of scenarios.

The Facts:
1) In 2000, 51.004 million voted for Gore, 50.459 for Bush and 3.275 for Nader and others.
2) Approximately 3.6mm of the 104.7mm who voted in 2000 died prior to 2004. The annual mortality rate was 0.87%.
3) The 2004 recorded vote (122.3mm) consisted of returning Gore, Bush, Nader, first-timers and others who did not vote in 2000(DNV2k).

The Final 2004 NEP weightings were mathematically impossible. Bush 2000 voters could not have comprised 43% (52.9mm) of the 2004 recorded vote; he only had 50.46mm votes in 2000 and approximately 48.7mm were alive in 2004. A maximum of 49.2mm Gore voters and 48.7mm Bush voters could have voted in 2004.

Since the impossible Final NEP was forced to match the recorded vote, the recorded vote must have been impossible as well. The fact that Kerry’s vote shares declined dramatically from the 12:22am NEP timeline to the 2pm Final is further confirmation that the Final did not reflect the true vote; rather, it was matched to a fraudulent, miscounted vote. Evidence of fraud abounds in Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Nevada, etc.


Base Case Assumptions

1) 12:22am NEP (13047 respondents)
Kerry won 57% of new voters(DNV2k);
91% of Gore, 10% of Bush and 71% of Nader voters.
In the Final 2pm NEP (13660 respondents) which was matched to the recorded vote, Kerry won 54% of DNV, 90% of Gore, 9% of Bush and 71% of Nader voters.

2) 2000 Voter mortality
The annual mortality rate was 0.87%. Therefore the assumption is that 4*0.87= 3.5% of 2000 voters died prior to the 2004 election.

3) 2000 Voter Turnout in 2004
An unknown percentage of Gore, Bush and Nader voters turned out in 2004.
For the base case, we assume 95%.

4) Uncounted Votes
According to the Census (and Greg Palast), approximately 125.7 million ballots were cast in 2004. Only 122.3mm were recorded. Therefore, 3.4mm (2.74%) of the total votes cast were uncounted.

5) Kerry share of Uncounted votes
The vast majority of uncounted (lost, spoiled, absentee, etc.) ballots are from heavily Democratic minority districts. Therefore, the base case assumption is that Kerry won 75% (2.58mm) of the uncounted votes.

Calculation of the Base Case Scenario:
Kerry 66.10mm (52.57%)
Bush 58.38mm (46.43%)
Other 1.27mm (1.01%)


Switched Votes:
Now we have the information we need to calculate the number of votes which were switched from Kerry to Bush.

The True Vote is a simple sum of three parameters, two of which are known:
True Vote = Recorded Vote + Uncounted Votes + Switched Votes

Given Kerry’s true vote, recorded and uncounted votes, we can solve for the number of votes which were switched to Bush:

Switched Votes = True Vote - Recorded - Uncounted
4.488 = 66.097 - 59.027 - 2.582

Approximately 4.5 million votes were switched from Kerry to Bush.

[bullimiami]

1. its obvious unless you dont want to see it.

just like 9/11

[glengarry]

35. Assume the corrupted Final NEP vote shares. Kerry still won.

Assume the Final 2pm NEP (13660 respondents) in which Bush vote shares were inflated and impossible weights were used to match the corrupted vote count.

But for this scenario, we will retain the feasible weights and the other data assumptions as per the prior base case. Kerry is still the winner by 3.65mm votes, with 2.84mm (4.4%) switched to Bush.

Kerry vote share assumptions:
Final NEP; 12:22am (base case)
54% of DNV ; 57%
90% of Gore ; 91%
9% of Bush ; 10%
71% of Nader ; 71%

Calculated Vote:
Kerry 64.43mm (51.24%)
Bush 60.78mm (48.33%)
Other 0.54mm (0.43%)

Switched Votes:
Calculated Vote = Recorded Vote + Uncounted Votes + Switched Votes

Switched Votes = Calculated - Recorded - Uncounted
2.84 = 64.43 - 59.027 - 2.582

Switched-vote rate: 4.4% = 2.84/64.43

[rec_report]

2. It's a *treasonable* offense. n/t

[lonestarnot]

3. It sure the fuck is!

[Old and In the Way]

4. TIA makes the case mathematically....I make the case in my gut.

Gore won by 500,000 in 2000. By 2004, Bush had let 9/11 happen...lied about a causus belli, and had taken a budget surplus and converted it to a deficit. He lost the debates and Kerry was getting huuuuge crowds. Bush? Tight shots in auditoriums.

How many Democrats, considered 2000 and Bush's record, voted for Bush? How many Independents? I know lots of Republicans who voted for Kerry.

No way Bush won. The Republican Syndicate stole it.

[glengarry]

37. Well, according to the BushCo true believers...

"How many Democrats, considered 2000 and Bush's record, voted for Bush? How many Independents? I know lots of Republicans who voted for Kerry".

The naysayers say 14.6% (1 in 7) Gore voters defected.
And that only 7.2% of Bush voters defected to Kerry.
They also say that Kerry only won 52.9% of new voters.

But they must say all that to account for their Bush win scenario.

If you believe...

[elocs]

5. A rhetorical question, but knowing it and proving it are 2 different questions.

Other than Bush, we all have known of people who we "know" are criminals, but were still walking around. Knowing and proving are 2 different things. Both the defense and prosecution go through great lengths to get just the right jury they want when the person is indicted. In the case of impeachment the jury is already seated and well known ahead of time--the U.S. Senate and these people are already well known and it is fairly predictable how they would vote. At the best the Democrats are probably only assured of 50 votes to convict in the Senate, needing at least 50 Republican Senators to vote to convict to get the 67 votes needed. This is nothing to take lightly or to magically believe they will appear. If you really want an impeachment with a chance of conviction, stop jumping up and down and screaming bloody murder and actually do some work on convincing some Republicans that public sentiment is not with them and if they want to stay in office (I assure you they do) they need to rethink their position on impeachment or it will be hung like a millstone around their necks at election time.

On edit:
Another thing to do is to actually try and convince the Democratic members of Congress to support impeachment and conviction because without them you are out of luck no matter how long and loud you scream about what is righteous and noble and their constitutional duty. Hot anger is not very effective in the long run and it controls you. Cold anger is a useful tool and weapon and will yield much better results.

[magellan]

6. If things were as they should be, yes

And I didn't need all the math to know the election was stolen (although I have the utmost respect for those who can do those kinds of calculations). I only had to wake up the next morning and see the impossible shift of numbers to Bush**. There's no math to support the massive shift that occurred in the span of an hour and a half -- only rw opinion which is nothing but lies.

[oldtime dfl_er]

7. Apparently in this political cllimate

NOTHING is impeachable.

[valerief]

8. If the controlling families who own the world says it's an impeachable

offense, it is. Otherwise, more news on Anna Nicole's baby.

[Kurovski]

9. OMG! Did you hear something about the BABY!!???!

If the administration knew of and was involved in election theft, just add it to the growing list of reasons to impeach.

K&R.

[truedelphi]

10. Actually I think that some of the recent accounts of legal actions taken against

Suspicious vote count maneuvers as well as actions against Blackwell could offer some proof.

Blackwell is key - he was set up to be the Secretary of State as well as the Republican chairman of Ohio for a reason. When in the wee hours of November 3rd, 2004, Andy Card announced that Bush had won, he offered as his evidence for okaying the win as Blackwell calling and telling him that Ohio had gone to the Bush column.

All things Blackwell lead back to the White House.

[magellan]

11. Has the lock down in OH due to "terrorist threat" on election night ever been explained?

IIRC Blackwell's minions locked themselves in to count votes. Even reporters weren't allowed access. This went on well into the night.

[glengarry]

31. And don't forget Jebby...

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQResponse.htm#Florida

Consider Florida’s implausible vote count by machine type and party registration. In 2000, Bush supposedly “won” by 547 official votes. Given Gore’s 70% share of 180,000 uncounted under/over votes, he would have won by at least 60,000 votes had they been counted.

In 2004, Bush supposedly “won” by 52-47%, a 368,000 vote margin. But the Democrats had a 41- 37% registration advantage in Touch Screen (TS) counties and a 42-39% edge in Optical Scan (OS) counties. Kerry won the TS counties (3.86mm votes) by 51-47%, but Bush won the OS counties (3.43mm votes) by a whopping 57-42%.

Kerry’s low vote shares in the three most heavily populated (and Democratic) TS counties (Palm Beach, Broward, Dade) are highly suspect. Florida voter registration by party is the same in TS and OS counties, so we aren’t comparing apples and oranges.

snip



Four different models indicate that Kerry won Florida. The first was based on voting machine type (optical scanners and touch screens) and used 2004 NEP “Party ID” vote shares with party registration percentage weights. Kerry won by 50.7-47.7%, a 221,000 vote margin.

The second was based on uncounted (1%) and switched vote (6.9%) assumptions applied to the 2004 recorded vote. Kerry won by an identical 221,000 votes.

In a third calculation based on 12:22am NEP vote shares with weights adjusted to the Florida 2000 recorded vote, Kerry is a 52.6-46.7% winner.

In a fourth calculation, based on uncounted (3%) and switched vote (7%) assumptions applied to the recorded vote, Kerry is a 51.3-48.2% winner.

Assuming that Kerry won 70,000 of 96,000 Nader 2000 votes (based on his 71% NEP share), he had a built-in 100,000 vote advantage on Election Day … assuming all the votes would be counted.

The final Zogby pre-election poll had Kerry winning by 50-47%. Assuming a 1.0% margin of error, the probability is 1 in 12.7 trillion that Kerry's total TS county vote share would exceed his total Florida share by 4.2%.

[garybeck]

12. Why do you hate America?

[bleever]

13. We may have moved beyond impeachement, and beyond treason,

to a fracture in federal governance, meaning a government of the United States that embodies and protects the legacy and record and judicially reinforced essence of America.

In some ways, this is truly unparalleled since the Civil War.

The reckoning is coming sooner than we thought, and may last longer than anyone anticipates.

Given the number of things that "no one could have anticipated".

[earth mom]

14. Yes, it's one of many crimes on a very long list.

:grr:

[Botany]

15. Ohio 2004 Facts

more registered dems than repugs
new registrations were 10 to 1 in favor of Kerry
between 2000 and 2004 Ohio lost more jobs than any other state
1:07 AM 11/3/04 Female voters Kerry 52 v 48% male voters 49 vs 47% (exit polls)

[glengarry]

17. Compare: 12:22am Ohio Exit Poll vs. Final Ohio EP vs. 12:22am NEP

http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQResponse.htm#Ohio

They argued that the Ohio exit poll does not indicate fraud. But they ignored the massive documented evidence of uncounted and switched votes, apart from voter disenfranchisement. And two election workers were convicted of rigging the recount. They criticized the 12:22am Ohio exit poll (1963 respondents) which Kerry won by 52-48%, yet believe the 2:06pm Final (2020 respondents) in which the vote shares were changed in favor of Bush to match a miscounted Ohio recorded vote. This was just like the final 2pm NEP in which the vote shares were changed from the 12:22am timeline to match a miscounted National vote. With the original weights, it would have been necessary to inflate the Bush vote shares to implausible levels. An exhaustive statistical study of actual ballots in Ohio’s Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) indicated that 6.15% of Kerry’s votes were switched.



................ Ohio........................ Ohio Final......................... NEP
........... 12:22am (1963)............ 2:06pm (2020).............. 12:22am (13047)
GENDER Mix Votes Kerry Bush.. Mix Kerry Bush.. Mix Votes Kerry Bush Other
Male.... 47% 2.65 51% 49%... 47% 47% 52%.... 46% 56.20 47% 52% 1%
Female 53% 2.99 53% 47%... 53% 50% 50%.... 54% 65.97 54% 45% 1%

Total.. 100% 52.06% 47.94%.. 48.59% 50.94%.. 100% 50.78% 48.22% 1.00%
Total 5.635 2.934 2.701.......... 2.738 2.870.......... 122.17 62.04 58.91 1.22

[Botany]

18. How about the fact the vote was "hosted" on R.N.C. computers in ..

... Chattanooga, Tennessee?

I wonder how many other states went to Smartech? Nice little scam you push through
HAVA and make everybody vote electronically and then run the data through "friendly
computers," and you can control elections. Having a lap dog press helps too.


Part of what I saw in Ohio 2004.

http://www.thousandreasons.org/get_article.php?article_id=13

[deutsey]

16. Now, wait a minute...let's give them the benefit of the doubt here

If we're a democratic republic, sure, stealing two elections is a "high crime."

If we're an authoritarian dictatorship, then, no, the Busheviks are unimpeachable.

See? There's a lot of gray here...Just like Clinton splitting hairs over what the meaning of "is" is, it's all in how you define what "America" is.

:sarcasm:

[jmowreader]

19. It's not impeachable. Sorry.

Now...if we can absolutely PROVE Bush stole seven million votes while he was getting a blowjob, it's absolutely impeachable.

[Ghost in the Machine]

20. only if a democrat does it...

:sarcasm:

[tubbacheez]

21. Impeachment is only for personal crimes, sadly

If someone has evidence that Bush or Cheney personally tampered with the elections, or personally ordered someone to do so, then an impeachment case for election fraud might have some legs.

Constitutionally speaking, for better or worse, doing a horrible job in office is remedied by the elections process.


Long term, the best thing we can do is to educate people and make sure they vote. Getting mad about an issue is a good start, but folks must realize we cannot afford disengage from the political process, ever. The year we do, the opposition will sweep into power.

[progressoid]

22. Only impeachable if it leaves a stain on a blue dress,

[Forkboy]

23. Apparently,anything short of Bush actually renaming himself Pol Pot,

and sitting on a throne of human skulls isn't enough for impeachment.

And I'm not sure that would do it either.

[Independent_Liberal]

24. Gee whiz, I can't believe how cynical people are around here.

"Nothing is in this political climate."

"Unless a blowjob was involved."

"Nothing short of Bush renaming himself Pol Pot."

"Only if a Democrat does it."

ENOUGH WITH THE SARCASM AND CYNICISM ALREADY! IT'S GETTING OLD!

None of that is true and you know it!

[BattyDem]

25. Cynicism ... or realism?

If any ONE of the disasters/frauds/lies/scandals/screw-ups had happened while a Democrat was president, the media would have been relentless! A Dem never would have gotten the passes that Bush* has. A Dem never would have gotten the softball questions. A Dem would have been in deep trouble if 9/11 happened on his/her watch. A Dem would have been run out of Washington after allowing an entire US city to drown. A Dem never would have had "propaganda" reported as fact by every major media outlet. A Dem never would have been able to bankrupt our economy and have the media praise its strength. A Dem never would have been able to piss all over the Constitution without anyone questioning it. A Dem never would have had a Republican Speaker of the House say "Impeachment is off the table." A Dem never would have been able to get away with the excuses, double-talk and outright lies that Bush* has.

Why do I believe this? Well ... Clinton got a blowjob and the MSM (along with the entire GOP) acted like our democracy itself was in danger of collapsing! So of course people are a bit cynical. :-(

Impeachment is not impossible ... but because of today's political climate and the alliance of the MSM and the GOP, it is far more difficult to impeach a Republican than a Democrat.



edited: typo :blush:

[Independent_Liberal]

26. Well, you're right about that.

I agree that it's much easier when they're trying to get rid of Democrats than Republicans. But I still think people have a tendency go overboard with the cynicism every once in a while.

[Thothmes]

27. Votes switched

Only if you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Sorry I cannot see your statistical "proof" standing legal scrutiny. Now if you had a handful of witnesses that could attest to factual tampering/changing/destroying votes you may have a shot, but only if you can prove that their actions came via direction from the White House.

[glengarry]

28. There is no need to prove it beyond reasonable doubt...

In a civil case the preponderance of evidence (over 50%) is sufficient.

The statistical probability of massive fraud is overwhelming circumstantial evidence.

[Thothmes]

32. Reasonable doubt

The conventional wisdom High Crimes and Misdemeanors equal Felony level crimes. This is not a civil matter.
Beyond reasonable doubt would be the standard at the senate Trial. Better come equipped with more than circumstantial evidence.

[glengarry]

33. The statistical anomalies supplement the hard evidence of fraud

coming out of Ohio and elsewhere. The new Ohio SOS has taken control of the ballots. The investigation into the politicization of the DOJ has already revealed evidence of election fraud disguised as voter fraud. And White House servers were fed Ohio real-time voting data.

Put it all in a souffle of statistical anomalies, with the media hiding raw precinct exit poll data, ballot tampering, voter disenfranchisement and WH control of the data feeds and you have the makings of an impeachable offense.
___________________________________________________________________
http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/TruthIsAllFAQResponse.htm#Ohio

They argued that the Final Ohio exit poll does not indicate fraud. But they ignored the massive documented evidence of uncounted and switched votes, apart from voter disenfranchisement. And two election workers were convicted of rigging the recount.

Kerry won the 12:22am Ohio exit poll Gender demographic (1963 respondents) by 52.06-47.94%, but lost the 2:06pm Final (2020) by 50.94-48.59%. In the Final, the vote shares and weights were changed in favor of Bush to match the miscounted Ohio recorded vote. This was just like the final 2pm NEP in which vote shares and weights were changed from the 12:22am time line to match the miscounted National vote.

Two models confirmed that Kerry won Ohio. The first was based on 12:22am NEP vote shares with weights adjusted to the Ohio 2000 recorded vote. Kerry was the 51.74-48.26% winner, within 0.32% of the exit poll. The second was based on uncounted (3%) and switched vote (6.15%) assumptions applied to the recorded vote. Kerry was the 52.6-47.4% winner. An exhaustive statistical study of actual ballots in Ohio’s Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) indicated that 6.15% of Kerry’s votes were switched.

[Thothmes]

34. Hard Evidence

Now prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bush personally directed/instigated or in some way is directly connected with the above. That is what you will have to convince 60 Senators of, if you are going to remove him from office..

[glengarry]

36. We have to convince 17 Republicans in the Senate to get 67 votes to convict

But first we need a majority vote in the House to impeach. And if he is impeached, the Repubs will force Bush to resign rather than face a senate trial.

[lies and propaganda]

29. I would say so.

Katrina and treason just a few more off the top of my head...

[Cleita]

30. In an era where the government was guided by the

Constitution, I would think so, but * has committed so many impeachable offenses, some even treasonous, yet no one seems to want to put his feet in the fire.