Evidence Of A Stolen Election


As coincidence would have it, Mark
Crispin Miller`s new book, "Fooled
Again
"
(Basic Books), documenting the Republican
theft of the 2004 presidential election, arrived in the
same mail delivery with the Jan. 12 edition of the
Defuniak Springs Herald,
the locally owned weekly
newspaper in a Florida panhandle county seat.

The Florida panhandle is
thoroughgoing Republican. Even Democrats run as
Republicans. Nevertheless, the newspaper`s editor, Ron
Kelley, believes that American political life is
measured by something larger than party affiliation. In
his editorial, "The Shepherds and the Sheep,"
Kelley reports that two Florida counties have banned any
further use of Diebold voting machines after witnessing
a professional demonstration that the machines, contrary
to Diebold`s claim, are easily hacked to record votes
differently from the way in which they are cast by
voters.

The pre-election statement by
Diebold`s CEO
that he would
work to deliver the election to Bush
was apparently
no idle boast. In five states where the new
"foolproof"
electronic voting machines were used,
the vote tallies differed substantially from the exit
polls. Such a disparity is unusual. The chances of exit
polls in five states being wrong are no more than one in
a million.

Miller describes considerably more
election fraud than voting machines programmed to count
a proportion of Kerry votes as Bush votes. Voters were
disenfranchised in a number of ways. Miller reports
incidences of intimidation of, and reduced voting
opportunities for, poorer voters who tend to vote
Democrat.

Some of Miller`s evidence is
circumstantial. However, he documents widespread
Republican dirty tricks and foul play. The media`s
indifference to a stolen election burns Miller as much
as the stolen election itself.

Miller is not alone in his
concerns. The nonpartisan U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO), in response to a congressional request,
investigated a number of complaints regarding the
electronic voting machines.

Here are

some of the problems
noted in the GAO`s September
2005 report: [PDF,
107 pp]

  • Some voting machines did not
    encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it
    was possible to alter both without being detected.

  • It was possible to alter the
    machines so that a ballot cast for one candidate
    would be recorded for another.

  • Vendors installed uncertified
    versions of voting system software at the local
    level.

  • Access was easily compromised
    and did not require a widespread conspiracy. A small
    handful of people is sufficient to steal an
    election.

Curiously, the media have shown no
interest in the GAO report. In my opinion, a free press
has proven to be inconsistent with the recently
permitted highly concentrated corporate ownership of the
U.S. media.

The electronic voting machines
leave virtually no paper trail, and their use involves
private, potentially partisan corporations tabulating
the votes with proprietary software that is not
transparent.

A number of counties in various
states have decided to return to paper ballots that can
be verified and recounted. But now that Republicans have
learned that they can use the electronic machines to
control election outcomes, the disenfranchisement of
Democrats is likely to be a permanent feature of
American "democracy."

Other reports claim that the
undersampling by pollsters of Democratic voters creates
a percentage bias that exaggerates the number of
Republican voters by as much as 5 percent, thus
providing cover for vote fraud. If hard-to-reach
Democratic voters, such as the working poor, are less
likely to answer telephones, polls can create the
illusion that there are more Republican voters than in
fact exist.

If the electronic voting machines
are then rigged to shift 5 percent or 6 percent of the
vote to the Republican candidate, the result is not at
odds with the expected result and can be used as
"evidence"
to counter the divergence between exit
polls and vote tally.

The outcome of the 2004
presidential election has

always struck me as strange
. Although Kerry was a
poor candidate and evaded the issue most on the public`s
mind, by November 2004 a majority of Americans were
aware that Bush had led the country into a gratuitous
war on the basis either of incompetence or deception.

By November 2004, it was completely
clear that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass
destruction and that Bush had rushed to war. People were
concerned by the changing rationales that Bush was
offering for going to war. Moreover, the needless war
was going badly, and the results bore no relationship to
the rosy scenario painted at the time of the invasion.
It seems contrary to American common sense for voters to
have re-elected a president who had failed in such a
dramatic way.

Miller directs our attention to
Bush`s high-handed treatment of dissenters. If
electronic voting machines programmed by private
Republican firms remain in our future, dissent will
become pointless unless it boils over into revolution.
Power-mad Republicans need to consider the result when
democracy loses its legitimacy and only the rich have
anything to lose.  

COPYRIGHT

CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Paul Craig Roberts is the author with Lawrence M.
Stratton of


The Tyranny of Good Intentions : How Prosecutors and
Bureaucrats Are Trampling the Constitution in the Name
of Justice
.

Click


here

for Peter Brimelow`s

Forbes Magazine interview with Roberts about the
recent epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct.