January 10, 2005
Omerta breaks

The King County Elections staff are starting to break "omerta" and talk about some of the monkey business that's going on in their deparment. In the extended entry is an anonymous e-mail from someone claiming to be a King County elections worker that was sent to the Rossi campaign on the morning of Nov. 17 [it was later that day when the first count was completed]. Some of the hints in here have been confirmed by later events. Notice in particular the questions about the sending of military ballots and the tie-in to today's Seattle Times article and the mysterious update to the King County "fact sheet". I just obtained this e-mail today. You would be correct to be skeptical of any such bombshell revelations from an anonymous source passed along by a political campaign. All I can say is that I'm getting a number of e-mails and blog comments from different people who are longtime observers of the KC elections department. Some of these tipsters are anonymous. Others give their names and provide corroborating details with each other, with the anonymous ones and with independent sources. I'd be surprised, frankly, if every single detail in all of these tips will ultimately be proven true. But I'm willing to wager that some of what's alleged here will be proven true. Enough that not only will the election be set aside, but that some major figures in King County government will be taken out.

My friendly invitation to potential whistleblowers at the King County Elections department: If you're aware of any wrongdoing, come forward. Whether it's blatantly criminal [less likely, in my opinion] or simple mistakes that could have changed the outcome of the election but have gone unreported [more likely, I imagine], come forward. It's your civic duty as a public servant.

The election worker's e-mail follows:

I work at elections and I spent most of the night tossing and turning without being able to sleep. I just felt like I needed to send you a message on an anonymous computer before I go into work today. I can't contact you directly, because I can't afford to lose my job, and I am hoping that you can just have your lawyers look into these things because if you expose where you got this information from it will point a finger right at a few of us here in the office who are just disgusted with what is going on. But if there was ever an investigation, we would all be happy to tell the truth.

Before I start, I just want to say that I don't consider myself to be a Republican. Actually, I work in elections, so I don't really consider myself a Democrat, either, but I probably vote for more Democrats than Republicans.

But I am just sick to my stomache about what they are doing to you people (the Republicans) here in King County. I voted for Gregoire, I'll admit it, but it sure seems to me that it's much more important for the votes to be counted correctly and for everyone to know the election was fair, than for one side to be able to screw around with the numbers to make their candidate win in a close race. Like the Democrats are doing here.

I have been reading all of the articles in the papers because honestly we get more correct information about what we are working on from the newspapers then we do from our own management. We're all spread out in three different places, and even in the administration building, we are on two different floors so we don't have the opportunity to talk with each other as much as normal, plus management tries to keep us from having certain information because they are always afraid of leaks. But we do talk enough to know when things are just not right and there's times when what's right for the voters has to be more important than anything else.

I have worked here for years, and we used to be all about the voters, and making every vote count every day and in everything we did. That was the attitude from top to bottom. That's not the way it is anymore and it hasn't been for a couple of years. I'm tired of management being able to lie to the press and getting a free ride. And don't believe the crap about Ron Sims not being involved. There are people from his office coming over here all the time. They have it set up like the Mafia - the Don can never be touched because all the communication goes through the trusted lieutenants. But don't you believe for a second that Ron isn't calling the shots, and isn't ALWAYS calling the shots.

Here are some things from the inside view that seem like they should be important to this election.

1. I think you should ask Bill or Dean point blank if there were any problems with the military ballots and see what they tell you. Maybe they will tell you the truth, maybe they won't. Word finally got around to us regular workers that the only military ballots sent out were the overseas ones on October 8 or 9 (which was late already), and that any we put in the computer or that were what we call domestic (US mail address) didn't go out because of a "glitch" in the computer. I get tired of everything being blamed on a glitch. This is just plain a screw-up by the absentee people. They had the data to mail these ballots out and they just didn't do it.

We kept getting complaints from military people by phone and email before the election and some after, and so anyvoter who realized early enough that their ballot was not coming and had the opportunity to pick up the phone (some military people are on assignments that keep them from being able to call the outside world, even when they are stationed here in the US) and called was sent a ballot, but anyone who did not, or could not call in time did not get one. If you want do public disclosure requests for any emails about this (like copies of the complaints to the office), do it quick.

We have rules being enforced about erasing email fast to make sure that it doesn't get backed up and nobody from the outside can request email and the county can't get in trouble for not providing it. I think this is because of the lawsuit from that guy that got the county fined, but they claim it is for better "information management". I think this is illegal, it seems like complaints that come into the election office belong to the people and better information management doesn't consist of erasing documents and voter complaints, but who am I to say? I just work here.

2. Like I said in the one above, if you want any documents for a recount or for any lawsuits, better ask King County for them now, because we have been told to delete things to keep them from getting out to the public. You might want to ask the county to freeze anything they have. At least make them tell all of us staff not to delete our e-mail or "old" documents.

3. I think someone needs to do the math and find out where the extra mystery 10K ballots really came from, because we sure don't know and we work here. We can figure out about 3,000 more than we thought, mostly provisional ballots sent from other counties and some late arriving overseas ballots with good postmarks. The absentee supervisors have gotten all weird and secretive when people ask. And no, they weren't just sitting around here. The extra "good" ballots appeared over the weekend. I don't know what absentee "supervisor" told you people that we don't have a way of counting the incoming absentee ballots, that's just bulls**t if you pardon my French. We DO have a way of knowing how many absentees have come back.

The ballots are sorted and counted as they come in every day and we know how many have come in. We post it on the internet for crying out loud. There hasn't been any large amount of ballots come back for a whole week.

The mail drops down to just a trickle by the Monday after the election. Even if you take all of the ballots we got in the mail on last Saturday and this past Monday (hardly any, including military ballots) and add them to provisional ballots we got from out of the county on Saturday and Monday, it just doesn't add up. And there are ways to slip in extra ballots and make them look legitimate if the race is close. Ask for an exact accounting.

They will not be able to give you one right away. They will have to play with the numbers to make it look legitimate.

4. The Democrats asked to see just the provisional ballots that had no signature. If they were aware of what is really going on, they should have also looked at the provisional ballots that are being set aside and not counted because the voter is "not registered". We were so far behind with putting registrations in the computer that at one point the supervisors just made a set of boxes with thousands of registrations "disappear" overnight.

(And no, they were not entered. We had a night crew, but not a night crew so big or experienced that they could input thousands of registrations overnight.) We were weeks behind with no way to catch up and they were telling everyone and the papers that we were caught up. It was just a nightmare. We never would have gotten to these people anyway before the election even if the box had not disappeared. I bet that these cards will magically reappear after the election as registrations that were "too late" for this election. But they weren't. I saw when they came in. They were in on time, and now those people didn't get to vote or voted a provisional ballot that won't be counted.

Please look in to these things. Every vote should count, and people should be able to expect that the elections are not going to be a screwed up mess every time. And there's tons of screw ups in this office that get covered up each election. It didn't used to be this way.

Aren't there Republicans on the Council that can call for an investigation? AN OUTSIDE investigation, not a set-up to help hide the dirt and prop up Ron Sims? And not a Secretary of State investigation when they will just cover their friends' butts again. I know Reed is a Republican, but those people at the Secretary of State's office and the management they sent here are all friends, and will cover for each other above all else.

(And yes, I have voted for Ron Sims before, but never again. I'm tired of working for a county that is corrupt, and this person who votes for Democrats would gladly vote for a Republican if they will clean up the county. Hopefully you guys can run someone competitive next year, who's moderate enough that us disgruntled Democrats can vote for them, too.)

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 10, 2005 11:40 AM | Email This
Comments
1. The proverbial lid is officially blown.

Posted by: Bleeding heart conservative on January 10, 2005 11:49 AM
2. Wow.

Posted by: Bostonian on January 10, 2005 11:54 AM
3. Umm... I'm concerned about this: "I am hoping that you can just have your lawyers look into these things because if you expose where you got this information from it will point a finger right at a few of us here in the office who are just disgusted with what is going on."

Posted by: Bleeding heart conservative on January 10, 2005 11:59 AM
4. Stephen...is this call for whistleblowers limited to King County?

Any clue how to verify the votes in those places that used touch screens with no paper trail?

G Davis

Posted by: G Davis on January 10, 2005 12:00 PM
5. It's all coming together!

(Or coming apart, depending on where you're sitting.)

Posted by: Larry on January 10, 2005 12:04 PM
6. First a mystery judge is alleged as currupt yesterday with no follow up. Now a mystery worker makes some generized allegations.

Looks like Rossi has got an airtight case. Geesh.

Of course, the author sends the information to a Blog rather than keeping it to himself and sending it to someone who could have used the information like Rossi's attorneys. Oh well.

What was the return address? If there really was information and a witness, they could be tracked down and brought before the trial judge by Rossis' camp.

Posted by: Erik on January 10, 2005 12:07 PM
7. Erik,

You said.

"Of course, the author sends the information to a Blog rather than keeping it to himself and sending it to someone who could have used the information like Rossi's attorneys. Oh well. "

I guess in your haste to spout off you neglected to read the part where Stefan said the email was sent to the ROSSI CAMPAIGN on Nov 17th.

Well, these posts are all quite interesting and very informative. Thanks again to Stefan, Jim, Brian, etc... at soundpolitics. I'll check back periodically, but right now me and my boys are heading to Michael's Craft Store to get some supplies to make signs for tomorrow's Rally. Homeschooling is so much fun. I think our vocabulary words for today will be,

disenfranchised, certify, ratify, and omerta. :)

Posted by: Orange Robyn on January 10, 2005 12:11 PM
8. Bleedingheartconservative said:
I'm concerned about this: 'I am hoping that you can just have your lawyers look into these things because if you expose where you got this information from it will point a finger right at a few of us here in the office who are just disgusted with what is going on.'"

It sounds omenous, I agree, but I can't figure out what it means. I think it means that there are so few people working there that the powers that be will have no trouble identifying who sent the email. But it could mean something else too.

Posted by: jay bird on January 10, 2005 12:12 PM
9. Erik - Read the post. This was sent to the Rossi campaign. Stefan later obtained a copy. It was not sent directly to a blog.

Posted by: Marc on January 10, 2005 12:13 PM
10. Erik, you just keep up your Bhagdad Bob act, if you so choose. More and more is finally coming out about the mess that is KC Elections, which many have suspected/known in some cases for quite some time.

What's Omerta?
Thanks for sharing that email, Stefan. Wow!

Posted by: Michele on January 10, 2005 12:14 PM
11. Michele,
Omerta is "A rule or code that prohibits speaking or divulging information about c.ertain activities, especially the activities of a criminal organization"

Posted by: Bostonian on January 10, 2005 12:18 PM
12. I had been hesitant to join the growing calls for the FBI, but after reading this, i'm firmly in that camp now.

Posted by: N on January 10, 2005 12:18 PM
13. Michele,

Omerta n. the code requirement alleged to apply to members of the Mafia, requiring that they remain silent about any crimes of which they have knowledge {Late 19th C. From talian dialect, from latin Hhumilitas "humility," from Humilis, "humble." The underlying meaning is "subjugation to the good of the society."

Per Encarta World English Dictionary

Posted by: Orange Robyn on January 10, 2005 12:20 PM
14. Okay, thanks for the definitions, Bostonian and O. Robyn. A whimsically well-chosen word (now that I understand it!), indeed, for the purposes of that entry!

We need a system in the elections division (maybe everywhere in KC gov) with phone logs and recorded conversations between officials with each other and the KC executive. Many are the stories of corruption that have come out of there (the exec's office). Watch these people like a hawk!

Posted by: Michele on January 10, 2005 12:29 PM
15. Ditto Bostonian, "Wow."

Posted by: Susan on January 10, 2005 12:33 PM
16. I've now gone from "move on" to support for a revote on this issue - but there should be an immediate lawsuit filed to freeze all communication records (e-mails, phone logs, etc.) in the KC elections office. Destroying evidence is a serious crime. There are ways to recreate destroyed e-mails, but if the backups aren't done before an e-mail is erased, I doubt we have the records.

This will be a good test of evidentiary law, I suppose - should government keep all communications? For how long?

Posted by: steve miller on January 10, 2005 12:36 PM
17. Methinks the fit is about to hit the shan.......I pray that this is not going to be swept under the rug as with most other attempts at uncovering Democrat wrongdoing.

Posted by: Scott in Carnation on January 10, 2005 12:37 PM
18. I know when I came forward about the provisionals I had several calls that night from people within King County R&E both D's and R's saying thank you for coming forward.

Many won't come forward because they are affraid of losing their jobs. I could care less since I wasn't planning on returning!

Posted by: Joe on January 10, 2005 12:41 PM
19. I wonder if one could do a PDA to acquire docs/rules/emails from KC on the process for retaining and backing up emails?

Posted by: Rob on January 10, 2005 12:42 PM
20. Hi. Does anyone know what, exactly, it would take for the feds to get involved here and do a full-blown investigation of KC elections? I've lived in or near KC for 25 years now, and was not as reluctant as others to start suspecting and accusing of fraud. I know these people all too well, and I'm glad (sort of) that a lot of this is coming out and pointing more and more to outright fraud.

Anyway, what does it take to get the feds involved? The Chelan county thing was a great move by Rossi, but I fear more is needed to clean up the sludge and get past the obstructionistic obfuscation ever-present in KC elections.

There are some more vocab words for you, Orange :)

Posted by: Scott on January 10, 2005 12:43 PM
21. about time something was done up there. I just about screamed when I heard the repubs were thinking about throwing the towel in hopes of defeating cantwell in 06. If you don't fight today it is just going to get worse.

Posted by: countryboy on January 10, 2005 12:46 PM
22. As to e-mail, well it depends on the software and the policy.

Most server software does not actually delete anything until a certain time has passed (though it appears deleted) the default for most systems is 30 days so the clock is of course ticking.

Typically nightly backups should have been made, so depending on tape rotation policies etc. who knows what is actually available, typically it's a seven day cycle. I would hire a forensics company and check it out anyway.

If I were the republicans I would have all backup e-mail server tapes impounded until they can be examined, and I would examine them very quickly before any "Accidents" occured.

Posted by: Todd on January 10, 2005 12:46 PM
23. Anyone else wondering if Slade Gorton should be sitting in Cantwell's seat?

Posted by: Brad on January 10, 2005 12:46 PM
24. Anyone else wondering if Slade Gorton should be sitting in Cantwell's seat?

Posted by: Brad on January 10, 2005 12:47 PM
25. Yep, I'm thinking 'impoundment', too. There is too much risk that the clever beavers in the KC elections offices are even now scurrying to cover their tracks. I can imagine the conversations: "Quick!!! get those tapes out of here! delete those files! Get Rosemary Woods up here!"

Posted by: steve miller on January 10, 2005 12:49 PM
26. ROSSI attorneys need to get everyone in that office deposed in a hurry before people start "forgetting" things that happened over the last 3 months.

Posted by: Joe on January 10, 2005 12:52 PM
27. Stefan--
Goldy is now sidestepping the Dem "Spinners" mantra that their is no evidence of Fraud (F-word) or Conspiracy (C-word). The Dem "spinners" keep using it as do the Dem Legislators. The only problem for them is "fraud & conspiracy" are not the standard to contest this election no matter how much they huff and puff.
The Dems "spinners" and Legislators also contine to demand proof the problems would have changed the outcome know darn well that "proof" is impossible as ballots have been long since co-mingled by Logan and their other pals. And they ignore the law which says "appears" not "PROVES".

One other Dem "Spin" tactic is to isolate & minimize each allegation, saying by itself it wouldn't change the result. Do they really think the Court isn't going to combine all the allegations and evidence. It's like Scott Peterson's trial. The Dems would have you acquit Peterson because the Motive (girlfriend) alone isn't proof. The boat alone isn't proof. Time & location alone aren't proof. But the jury combined all the allegations and evidence and it was an easy call (GUILTY)!!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on January 10, 2005 12:56 PM
28. Brad,
As I said in another post, when I first saw Slade at the press conference on Jan. 7, I kinda thought that's why he was there.

If nothing else, Slade was the Victim Before Dino. How many other victims have we had? Monofail? Unsound Transit?

Posted by: SnoCo Voter on January 10, 2005 12:56 PM
29. I always wondered where in the world the first batch of 10,000 ballots came from. I remember how disgusted Stefan was with the data coming coming out of KC. Here is an election worker who wonders the same thing. I thought at the time, the election workers know - just a terrible mistake. Silly me. At what point DO the feds come in?

Posted by: CP on January 10, 2005 12:58 PM
30. All this talk about Sims and them covering their tracks got me thinking about an article I remember, and I found it. I don't think I can put links in these comments, can I?

It's from the Dec. 20 copy of the Seattle P-I. Here is part of the article, and the quote is from Ron Sims:

Now that Rossi's victory is threatened, "he is being bombastic. He is being incendiary and vitriolic. It's very unfortunate. But I don't believe that Mr. Vance or anyone else is going to be able to show that King County Elections acted inconsistently with the law."

I pointed this out in my blog. Notice how carefully that's worded. He doesn't deny anything; he just states that he doesn't think anyone can PROVE it, basically...I'm sure they've covered their tracks real well, but hopefully not well enough.

Posted by: Scott on January 10, 2005 01:03 PM
31. "...if you expose where you got this information from it will point a finger right at a few of us here in the office who are just disgusted with what is going on."

Before we get too excited about this - why would this be released when the sender clearly didn't want to risk exposure? Perhaps the current situation provides sufficient cover so that the author no longer fears retaliation. But maybe it's a red herring, designed to make Rossi's campaign look silly later.... Watch your step.

Posted by: Patrick on January 10, 2005 01:03 PM
32. I know here at a "major aerospace manufacturer" all email is kept for a long, long time. It doesn't matter if you delete it off your account, the company still keeps a copy for legal reasons. To me, it would be highly unethical (but what else is new), and possibly illegal, for King Co to actually delete email they deem to be incriminating. People can go to prison for that. Wasn't that part of the big problems at Enron... the cover-up was just as bad as the accounting scam? Hey, move over Rathergate, we've got Kingcogate :-)

Posted by: TomP on January 10, 2005 01:05 PM
33. True Patrick but the sender DID say that he/she would cooperate in any OUTSIDE investigation. Can't blame him for that. This outside investigation needs to happen BEFORE they cover their tracks. Again, how and when do we get an offical outside investigation?

Posted by: CP on January 10, 2005 01:08 PM
34. Regarding what it takes for the Feds to get involved.

I believe (based on talk radio - so hey, maybe it's all baloney) they are watching and taking notes, but will wait to take action until the State courts have had a chance to act and all of the appropriate WA government apparatus has had a chance to function. This is a state election, and the Feds don't want to appear to be stepping on toes or interfering. I'm pretty sure they would prefer the state to handle the mess and will only get involved if there isn't any other alternative to obtain a fair result.

Posted by: (the other) John Hawkins on January 10, 2005 01:19 PM
35. "... We have rules being enforced about erasing email fast to make sure that it doesn't get backed up and nobody from the outside can request email and the county can't get in trouble for not providing it..."

I think those rules could be obtained by a PDA. Along with the backup/email retention policies. If indeed the 'rules' are to 'erase emails fast' that could be incriminating.

Posted by: Rob on January 10, 2005 01:19 PM
36. Erik - Read the post. This was sent to the Rossi campaign. Stefan later obtained a copy. It was not sent directly to a blog.

Thanks for the correction. You are right. However, I still stay with my critique that accusations against unknown judges and posting of anonymous emails are not going to be of any use.

Yes, if the anonymous email was of significant use to the contest action, I do not believe it would have been disseminated to a blog by Rossi's camp. I believe the Rossi team has made the decision that the email, if authentic, has been determined to have only PR use and not practical use.

By the way, what ever happened to the claim that a BIAW handwriting expert determined that hundreds of affidavits re: absentee ballots were made by the same person?

This was a claim, that if true, could have really mattered to the election contest. There was never any expert making such a claim was there?

Posted by: Erik on January 10, 2005 01:20 PM
37. Call me a skeptic...while I agree with Shark that this could be a "Holy Crap Batman!" I too feel that we need to err on the side of caution about the validity of such claim.

I have never once felt that during the 2004 pre-election process that we had so many "Undecideds" who just couldn't decide which way to lean, because by mid october, if you didn't know who you were voting for, you're either a dead voter, or dead from the neck up, atleast.

So, some "election worker" who refused to identify herself, or himself, claims to "vote mostly" for democrats, felt pity for the folks at the Rossi camp? Or had sympathy for those reeling in agony over election mishaps, errors, mistakes, or F or C problems, or dare i say it....BIAS?

Anyone with a strong sense of ethical or moral values, would step up to the plate, come out into the public, and declare without exception: "I witnessed incompentencies committed, I can prove it, and, you better hurry up cuz the KC election board decreed: Delete everything, leave no trail".

Man, I should be posting this in my blog instead.... Good luck guys, but keep hold of your cynicism and skepticism. Err on the side of objectivity.

Posted by: FireWolf on January 10, 2005 01:23 PM
38. By the way, what ever happened to the claim that a BIAW handwriting expert determined that hundreds of affidavits re: absentee ballots were made by the same person?

That claim was erroneous and was debunked by a BIAW official on this website.

Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on January 10, 2005 01:24 PM
39. I'm with Patrick on this one so far. I say take what is written here with a "grain of salt".

Seems too convenient to me. And one of the first steps I'd take in a misinformation campaign. Start the opposition off on the wrong track, while covering up the other.

Posted by: Jim in Clark County on January 10, 2005 01:25 PM
40. A lot of people here asking about when the Feds come in. They don't. Or not in the governor's race, unless a Fourteenth Ammendment case can be made. "But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."

Personally, I don't think that is the way to go. It would be possible to go the the US House of Representitives, with a claim that the tampering also included votes US House, and get them to investigate or observe the Governor's race investigation to see if it impacts the House election results. Again from the US Constitution (Article I Section 5): "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members..."

Another alternative would be to bring a civil rights charge. Hmmm... Republicans being denied their civil rights in Washington state? Da ya think?

Posted by: Robert I. Eachus on January 10, 2005 01:30 PM
41. I'd agree that we should be skeptical of any particular claim, esp. an anonymous one, but we should also remember that the WA state GOP is not a pack of dummies. Any legal action they take will have solid evidence behind it, and they're not going to waste time with empty rhetoric a la Barbara Boxer. They can't afford to. They already have the press against them.

Posted by: Bostonian on January 10, 2005 01:33 PM
42. Where is KING 5 and the rest of them on this. Where's Lori MAstukowi,jean enerson(another face lift and here butt will be on her forhead)et al????

Posted by: logboom on January 10, 2005 01:47 PM
43. It's shocking to me that there's not been an organized protest of the king county election comission. I'm up for it, if someone's got some ideas.

Posted by: dpmiv on January 10, 2005 02:08 PM
44. I'm with Patrick on this one so far. I say take what is written here with a "grain of salt".

Here, here. There are two groups that have an incentive to stir the pot with anonymous emails:

1) Republicans who wish to get more momentum behind the revote effort; and yes

2) Democrats who wish to set up a straw man that can be knocked down easily and discredit all potential contest issues.

3) Non-partisons who don't care about the outcome but just like the action.

Posted by: Erik on January 10, 2005 02:10 PM
45. Did anyone ever really question that Ron Simms and his staff were corrupt or above throwing an election?

I'm sitting here watching the WA State Senate and wondering just how many of them were legitimately elected.

They all look giddy and happy to be massaging each other's egos. How can our Senate behave like such a happy bunch when the election for the state's most important office is such a mess?

Posted by: Iguana on January 10, 2005 02:14 PM
46. When do the Feds come in?

Hmmm...
Considering the findings....That perhaps military ballots were not sent out in a timely manner as required by federal law...And considering that the US Postal Service may have evidence against King County - proving that the military ballots were mailed out after the deadline....
The Feds may be called in with regard to the military ballot problems! From there......who knows? A Federal investigation into one part of this election - may uncover more areas of disenfranchisement and errors and fraud.

This can of worms is ripe for the opening!

Posted by: Deborah on January 10, 2005 02:15 PM
47. "They all look giddy and happy to be massaging each other's egos. How can our Senate behave like such a happy bunch when the election for the state's most important office is such a mess?"

Funny.....

I am watching and thinking the exact same thing!

I wonder how many other residents of this state decided to tune into the State legislature TV today?

Posted by: Deborah on January 10, 2005 02:18 PM
48. Wow. Thanks for sharing that. This has got to be the most interesting and damning bit of information I've seen yet out of this whole election debacle. I only wish this guy could testify without fear of losing his job.

Posted by: Ferrous on January 10, 2005 02:39 PM
49. The way I read the letter, the writer didn't say he/she was remaining anonymous but that "I just felt like I needed to send you a message on an anonymous computer before I go into work today."

Simple because the writer has gone unnamed HERE at SoundPolitics, does not automatically mean that they are unknown to the Rossi campaign and lawyers. It would be in the best interest of both the writer and the Rossi campaign to remain at the election office job as usual.

Posted by: Cheryl on January 10, 2005 02:48 PM
50. I could see it happening - even without glasses!

Posted by: TADD on January 10, 2005 02:57 PM
51. I don't see a whole lot of difference between the liberal Democrats in King County than the ones who were occupying the White House not too long ago.

For example, do you remember hearing about Hillary Clinton destroying (shredding) financial documents that came directly from Vincent Foster's office on what may have been the day before Vincent Foster was found dead with his dried blood running "uphill"?

Well, publicly, Christine Gregoire hasnít stood for any better values than Hillary Clinton did. So should we be surprised that these things are going on in King County?

Posted by: TADD on January 10, 2005 03:16 PM
52. Oh, and while Iím on a rollÖ

Hereís how Christine Gregoire and Hillary Clinton think.

They are both lawyers. They know better than anyone else, that to prove a case, you need evidence. Thatís why youíll find evidence conveniently ďdestroyedĒ when it involves questionable actions that pertain to their own gain.

Think about it. If the evidence is successfully destroyed, can people easily prove wrongdoing?

Posted by: TADD on January 10, 2005 04:12 PM
53. FireWolf,

I agree with you mostly about erring on the side of caution. With all the details in the email, it seems like it very well could be legitimate. However, as I read it, I too was cautiously skeptical.

On another note, I disagreed with your comment:

"I have never once felt that during the 2004 pre-election process that we had so many "Undecideds" who just couldn't decide which way to lean, because by mid october, if you didn't know who you were voting for, you're either a dead voter, or dead from the neck up, atleast."

I am one of the classic "undecideds" in Washington State. I think there are many of us in the state who do not pledge allegiance to any party...for me it's because I have some skepticism about BOTH parties. I look instead at the actual candidates and issues and form my opinions from that. Often times I do not make my final decision until the last few days before the election. This is not because I am "dead from the neck up", but actually because I enjoy debating the options and seriously looking at both sides before choosing one. And well, I'm also a procrastinator and save my decisions till the last minute.

That said, I voted for Rossi and support a revote. Again, more proof that I have brains. :)

Posted by: kristen on January 10, 2005 04:20 PM
54. So hereís the real deal. Based on what has been turned up so far my guess is its just the tip of the iceberg. The information found so far came with little effort and look was uncovered. Imagine what could be discovered if real people did come forward with no fear of reprisal, if investigator could go in and recover ALL the hidden info and docs and so on. We the people of the State of Washington would be absolutely appalled. The people of this state (the common sense thinking man and woman) would call for an immediate impeachment of any and all government officials that have been elected or placed into position by the Demo spin machine. To the People of this STATE next time you go to the polls think about what you are doing and who you are voting for if indeed there is another chance to vote without the Demo spin machine in place.

Posted by: da on January 10, 2005 04:42 PM
55. Gee, it seems to me that if someone from the GOP really wanted to srew with the system, they could do it by sending just such an anonymous email to the Rossi campaign, for them to leak throught their surrogates here.

Funny how when it was the newspaper stories where Rossi supporters were admitting to having voted their dead spouses ballot, you were all about taking everything with a grain of salt, but no such caution with this hightly suspect email. I'd say that this alone proves that you folks have no interest whatsoever in getting to the truth or in the integrity of elections. Your sole goal is clearly to run PR for the Rossi campaign.

Posted by: John on January 10, 2005 05:18 PM
56. if its close, the dems cheat. need i say more. now for the complete exposure of this ruthless use of power.

Posted by: ray on January 10, 2005 06:22 PM
57. if its close, the dems cheat. need i say more. now for the complete exposure of this ruthless use of power.

Posted by: ray on January 10, 2005 06:23 PM
58. Well it all makes sense doesn't it. I'll bet the Republicans on the coun ty counsil can back it all up with similar stories of mis treatment by sims & friends. Growing up Gotti right here in seattle, riding around town in his lincoln town car with a driver no less. so worried about the environment riding around in that big ol gas guzzler. Tent city for Ron or walla walla?

I guess the flood gates will open now and the confesions will come flowing like milk and honey.

what a beautiful day in the neighborhood.

Posted by: chardonnay on January 10, 2005 07:22 PM
59. Initially I was in tears over this letter because it all makes sense, we all honestly know it.

But now, I am really really mad.
(thats a nice version of what I cannot say)

Posted by: chardonnay on January 10, 2005 07:27 PM
60. mind boggling...just mind boggling!!!!
how this can be going on in this day and age and there is no coverage of it other than 'some' radio and the blogs!!!
what is wrong with people that they can sit by and not do the right thing???
it has absolutely nothing to do with what party you do, or do not, belong to....it has EVERYTHING to do with being a decent human being and an american!
there is only one side here...that of justice.
and where, pray tell, are our trusty news stations??? doing nothing but stonewalling....typical...so typical.
thank you so much to the bloggers!!! without you we would surely lose our democracy.......

Posted by: christmasghost on January 10, 2005 07:33 PM
61. Kristen,

I can certainly understand what you mean about distrusting both sides. Neither party has shown much to be trustworthy about, nor have either side carried the flag about my ideals. That being said, after the 2002 political fiasco was over and everyone was planning on 2004, I knew then that there wasn't a democrat in the running that i'd vote for. I knew Nader wasn't credible, I had hoped for a strong independant (thankfully Ventura wasn't running), so being left with no options, all that was left was Bush in my humble opinion.

I wasn't out there for the Gregoire/Rossi vote, as I am still living in Minnesota, but Seattle never leaves you. :)

So, as far as undecided, I understand your position, you were waiting for something definitive. But for others I don't believe that anyone was seriously undecided at the last moment. They were merely waiting for a candidate to put his or her foot in their mouth to weed them out of the running.

That's not undecided tho.

Posted by: FireWolf on January 10, 2005 09:40 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?