Yes, King County really does have a magical binder with precinct reconciliation data (at least they did at one time). And by the account of someone who is familiar with the contents, it would confirm that there were a significant number of unexplained ballots that entered the system in King County and in excess of the number of verified eligible voters who participated in the election.
I've spoken at length with Joe O'Donnell, one of the few people who have actually seen the binder (other than the cabal of King County election officials who are keeping it under wraps). O'Donnell actually helped create some of the documents in the binder as a member of the post-election canvassing crew in November. (He is perhaps best known for exposing the story about the hundreds of unverified provisional ballots were illegally inserted into vote counting machines, which has been acknowledged by King County).
What's in the binder? In a nutshell, it shows the reconciliation of ballots and identified voters from the polling place. (Mail-in ballots are handled elsewhere). It would indicate polling-place-level discrepancies, such as missing ballots or unexplainable extra ballots. This reconciliation is not only a common sense procedure for quality control, it's also required by the Secretary of State's agency rules for conducting elections.
We won't know the exact number of discrepancies until we actually see the documents in the binder, but O'Donnell says that they show that the number of unexplained ballots is significant. Of course, if King County wanted to reassure the public that the that the number of ballots really did balance with the number of voters, it would have been very easy for them to release the binder and its contents to the various elected officials and members of the public who have been requesting this data for months.
Joe O'Donnell has shared with me a lot of substantive information about the contents of the binder and his observations as an election worker regarding the various anomalies that would have contributed to a significant number of unexplained ballots --
First, O'Donnell posted this description of the binder as a comment on an earlier entry:
The binder contains the following:The reconciliation documents would help quantify some of the disturbing phenomena that has previously been reported. Here is a quote from O'Donnell's statement when he revealed that unverified provisional ballots were counted:
A list of polling places in alphabetical order then broken down by precinct. It has the number of ballots counted by the Acuvote at the polls compared to the number of signatures/ballots distributed per each precincts poll books. It also contains notes on why the discrepancies exist. Some explanations are based on information in the poll books, notes by poll workers, and phone conversations with poll workers when the discrepancy was extremely high. Typically more ballots then voters, more voters then ballots, missing provisional's and so on. In some cases the discrepancies could not be explained and educated guesses were made as to why they occurred. I assure everyone that the report or "binder" exists. The real interesting issue is how the report has changed since they went back to try to reconcile the books a second time after the recounts.The binder does not contain private citizens information to be blacked out, and should be made available in its complete form immediately for anyone who wants to view it. Anything less should be considered a violation of PDA/FOIA.
The most alarming thing I found and several other co-workers experienced was that when calls were made to the inspectors many admitted that they tore up and/or through out provisional ballot envelopes when the person voting it did not return with the ballot to put it in the envelope. In almost all the cases the ballot appeared to have been voted. This means that we had no way of determining eligibility of the voter connected to that ballot and envelope. We will never know their name, if they were eligible, or if they had already voted, because in many cases proper protocol at the polls wasn't followed.Another curious items, not previously reported, that O'Donnell shared with me:
Some number of absentee ballots were also inserted into the AccuVote machines and counted with the polling ballots. These also cannot be tied to a specific voter and there's no way of telling who cast them or whether it constituted a double vote.
More of O'Donnell's revelations to come in a later post.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at February 26, 2005 11:37 AM | Email ThisWe really need the Feds or a Grand Jury to investigate this rotten, stinking mess!!!!!!
GO EVERGREEN FREEDOM FOUnDATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Norm on February 26, 2005 11:55 AMGreat job as usual. Please tell us that O'Donnell is going to testify in the upcoming court case...........
Thanks for all you do and keep smiling at the state government trolls, they are just trying to protect their bosses and probably their jobs. Who knows, they might be getting paid overtime to post here..........
Posted by: sgmmac on February 26, 2005 12:11 PM(1) Identification of the precinct or combination of precincts;
(2) The number of ballots issued;
(3) The number of used ballots which are special or challenged;
(4) The number of issued ballots that are spoiled.
At the closing of the polls, the ballots of each category enumerated in subsections (1) through (4) of this section shall be counted and recorded on the ballot accountability sheet. The accountability sheet shall be maintained with the precinct list. The precinct election officers shall attest to the accuracy of the ballot accountability sheet by each signing in the spaces provided. The ballot accountability sheet and the precinct list, shall be placed in the appropriate container for return to the counting center or auditor's office. The inspector shall remove and retain a copy of the list of participating voters as the "inspector's copy" for the statutorily required retention period.
Whenever anything occurs at a polling place that the precinct election officers feel may create a discrepancy in accounting for all of the ballots, the election officers shall note such events. The auditor may direct that such comments be included with the ballot accountability form or may be included on a separate comments sheet. If a separate sheet is used, it shall be signed by the precinct election officers.
Request all "Ballot accountablity forms" from King county and also the "inspectors copy" of the participating voters. If you do you should have what King county refers to "The Big Book"..
Thanks King county for being so helpful while you are at it!
Maybe it's time that we had a federal civil rights investigation of King County, for this might put the county in jeopardy of violating the 1964 Voting Rights Act.
Good for goose/gander.
Interesting. Great work, as always, Stefan
Steve
Posted by: Patches Pal on February 26, 2005 01:00 PM(2) Each precinct's results shall be reconciled with the precinct's ballot accountability form. The number of ballots issued should equal the number of ballots counted plus any ballots not counted...
This would be kind of a preliminary step to matching ballots with voters. But if absentee ballots were thrown into the mix at the precincts, even this relatively simple reconciliation isn't going to balance.
Thank you Mr. Shark. Keep goin'.
Posted by: Dave on February 26, 2005 01:26 PMThanks for the great work.
Can you or anyone else explain to me why we don't have these records? Are the Republican party lawyers not currently entitled to demand discovery Requests for Production under the Civil Court Rules pending the next hearing? What is the deadline for discovery? Have they requested them through proper pleadings? Are the County officials simply dragging their feet, or have they given any reason why they have not produced them? Are the Republican lawyers simply waiting for the issue to become ripe for a pre-trial motion on the next hearing date?
I must say that I find the whole process taking place to be mirky, obtuse, and quite difficult to fathom. Usually when I experience this, it means that I am overlooking the obvious in the hopes that people will act as they are required to.
I recognize that the Republicans are using their time wisely, but I do not understand the "Discovery Plan" in this case. Under the Court rules in Chelan County, if the judge orders the exchange of discovery, the parties must produce or face penalties and possible summary judgment dismissing claims. While it is unlikely that the court would grant such a motion in this case, the Republicans can call for a discovery conference and demand production. However, hopefully any recalcitrance on the part of the County will inure in some way to the benefit of the Republicans. If not what is the purpose of discovery? Pil pul?
If the Republicans are biding their time, it may make the rats look worse in the courts eyes for refusing to comply. Who knows?
The goddamn County of King works for us and has no business holding back anything germane to this case for any reason unless they readily state one, and the fact that they are stalling, on the face of it, is clear evidence of fraudulent consolidation of political power.
I wish someone would hold these bastard's feet to the fire.
Are absentee ballots distinguishable from poll ballots in King County? If so then those ballots should have been removed and voided during the first recount. If not, this is another defect in the system that’s wide open for fraud.
WAC 434-261-075 allows people to vote by mail in a form other than the ballot sent to them. This is allowed as long as the voter either doesn’t return the ballot or returns a blank ballot. All someone inclined to vote twice would have to do is send in his choices on scrap paper, fill in the ballot, and insert the ballot in a machine at the closest polling place. Isn’t that convenient?
And don't forget all those extra absentee ballots that were sent out accidently.
Posted by: Bob on February 26, 2005 03:53 PM??????????????????????? Huh?
Posted by: Michele on February 26, 2005 04:34 PMWell considering the way Dem's think, he may have a point. They don't use common sense at all.
It could be that those Free Spending Dem's turned Conservative (R's) are not going to spend as much.... That must be it, gotta be....
Posted by: chris on February 26, 2005 04:55 PMThe site is a good reminder to me that the left is good at building and maintaining mutual support of its constituents' interests. I don't think the right does this nearly as well. If this is true, you could either see it as the virtue of solidarity on the left, or the virtue of independence on the right. However, the satisfaction that might come from being an independent conservative is dimmed somewhat by living in a place that is run by moonbats -- moonbats who support each other well and thoroughly.
Posted by: Boonie on February 26, 2005 05:02 PMSomeone's going to have to start taking 'failure to comply to FOIA' to court.
Posted by: Al on February 26, 2005 05:13 PMMaybe the moonbat who wants the state income tax realizes that Washington voters are serious about no new taxes. So that is the new deceitful way to get millions more for the demogressives to waste.
At least that non-girly guy in Calif comes out and says what he wants. It sure beats all of the lying and toe shuffling up here in Washington. Embyronic stem cell research is Life Sciences Discovery Fund in Washington.
Posted by: sgmmac on February 26, 2005 05:32 PMThe godless fiends that rule this land,
Have stolen souls from every man.
Just a thought....After I spent a few minutes at Discoverthenetwork.com, I can almost guarantee it. Thanks bonnie for the link info, it was TMI...LOL
Posted by: Chris on February 26, 2005 05:52 PMI wonder if anyone has plugged Ron Sims and Queen Christine into the network? I for one would be eager to see what connections are made.
Posted by: ERNurse on February 26, 2005 07:31 PMTell me again..why the Feds aren't involved with this yet?
This has gone way beyond explainable inconvenience and error! King County is purposely withholding documents and information from the private groups investigating the elections, they are stonewalling the Republican attorneys who are properly requesting documents for discovery and they are literally ignoring the public requests for information via the FOIA!
At what point does this KC gang become recognized as the communist mafia that it is? How much more stonewalling by King County and the Dems of this state - will it take before the Whitehouse recognizes this as a risk to national security and interest?
I mean - if, as it appears, the integrity of our national, state and local elections is at stake...it would seem to require a huge and immediate *Federal* investigation and remedy!
Come on people....
It is time to bring on the Feds!
The left is dying. The Internet will be remembered mostly for its roll in exposing and destroying Marxism, liberalism, tyranny and statism. It started with emails from the Chinese students revealing the horrors at Tiannemen Square and it goes on today with the blogs taking down Rather, Jordon, etc.
Objectivity and truth and the long suppressed voice of all of us average Americans will prevail. Keep it up everyone. We're going to expose the KC partisan election machine and take down Queen Christine in the process.
Posted by: Jeff B. on February 26, 2005 08:55 PMI don't think the Rossi camp needs the binder to provide anymore evidence than they've already collected. I'm not even sure anyone was aware of this binder or it's potential importance before last week..
King County is suspiciously and inappropriately dragging their feet with regard to any disclosure of documents! Anything they do release will be viewed with just that much more scrutiny.....
Posted by: Deborah on February 27, 2005 01:03 AMOn a side note: I've noticed, while you and this blog have gotten a lot of press, there doesn't seem to be many other big time bloggers who link to you. When will this change?!
Posted by: Mark WWU on February 27, 2005 01:12 AMI think there would be some names that link these offices thru the exclusive election reward system.
Posted by: chardonnay on February 27, 2005 08:06 PMCould it be they only do a show
For certain people Oh no
For that might conclude we know
That the information is just so
Will the binder show we think we know
That votes and voters don't add up as so
Was Lucy's article based on blow not know
So where just where did that little binder go
cause it just isn't there oh no oh no