1. Isn't this statement slightly "over the top"?

Page 13:
"However, in the manual recount, King County illegally recanvassed 735 ballots and decided to count 566 of them. This raised Gregoire’s lead from 10 votes to 130."

As I recall, the highest court in this state ruled that it was legal to canvass those ballots as part of the second recount.

If so, how could it have been illegal to do so?

Posted by: Micajah on March 4, 2005 04:45 PM

2. Micajah, the highest court in the land once ruled that "separate but equal" was constitutional, and they were wrong. Or shall we move directly to Roe v Wade for court gymnastics???

Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 4, 2005 04:52 PM

3. dkpcowboy,

Words would have no meaning, if your rationale were applied. Until Plessy v. Ferguson was overruled, it was the law -- thus laws requiring segregation of the races were legal.

If you disagree with a court ruling, you could say the court is wrong. You cannot say the act which was held to be legal is really illegal, unless you insist on using your own peculiar meanings for the words you speak.

Posted by: Micajah on March 4, 2005 05:14 PM

4. My mistake, Micajah. I thought you were concerned with right and wrong. I see that's not the case.

Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 4, 2005 05:32 PM

5. Form versus substance. I understand the substance and appreciate the truly heroic work being done by the EFF. I would have preferred a bit more neutral, persuasive language. For example - starting the report with "The uncorrected problems grew exponentially, and a few more were added to the pile in 2004" is not really a good way to start a dispassionate objective report. Think about Stefan's work- brilliantly convincing because it is the dispassionate cold hard truth that knocks people over. Because of the hard work and substance behind the report, the cold truth objectively delivered is more than disconcerting.

Posted by: zapporo on March 4, 2005 05:37 PM

6. dkpcowboy,

Yes, it is your mistake -- both times.

Posted by: Micajah on March 4, 2005 05:43 PM

7.
Zapporo you stated:
"The uncorrected problems grew exponentially, and a few more were added to the pile in 2004"
Is there something that is untrue in that statement? Considering that KING county was warned repeatedly about voting irregularities many times in the past years...

KING5 TV video of vote fraud in King County -- March 1998.....
http://www.thetruthrocks.com/video/KING5.html
A Follow up report...
http://www.thetruthrocks.com/video/KING5_2.html

that statement sounds right on terget to me.

Posted by: Cliff on March 4, 2005 06:23 PM

8. zapporo,

EFF is telling it like it is. Most people are sick of the pansies who white wash and water down everything for political correctness.

Hat's off to EFF for putting this comprehensive report together and telling it like it is!!!

Posted by: No Phony's Allowed on March 4, 2005 06:33 PM

9. Micajah,

If you would have read the entire report you would have seen that this ruling was made using out dated laws that the Secretary of State's lawyer cited.

The ruling was supposed to be based on the current laws that were supposed to be in effect as part of the reforms made by our legislature and the Help America Vote Act inacted by the Feds.

Therefore, the counting of these illegal ballots is a correct statement.

Posted by: No Phony's Allowed on March 4, 2005 06:39 PM

10. Uh...yeah...both times.

Posted by: dkpcowboy on March 4, 2005 06:58 PM

11. As I recall, the highest court in this state ruled that it was legal to canvass those ballots as part of the second recount.

If so, how could it have been illegal to do so?

Guys, Micajah's point is that the law is what the court says it is.

Stating otherwise is like the tax evaders who assert that the federal income tax is unconstitutional because the 16th amendment was not ratified by all of the states.

However, the US supreme court has considered this argument on numerous occasions and rejected it.

Posted by: Erik on March 4, 2005 07:13 PM

12. Did anyone go to the local town meetings on Election reform? Everyone who signed up got an email today. I know this because when I got the email the addresses of every other person who attended were in the "to" section.

The subject line is: "Gregoire Election Reform Task Force Report"

This does not inspire confidence in the compentence of the task force members. I can't believe I have not received several snide "Reply All" comments from (justifiably) irate recipients.

Posted by: John on March 4, 2005 08:16 PM

13. No Phony's Allowed - I thought the report was a great read and quite comprehensive. I listen to Mr. Williams every morning and I can't believe how hard he works. I have an even harder time believing that much of what he has brought forward is being ignored. It is a travesty. My point is that there are ways of getting the same point across while slipping under the liberal radar, writing in a strictly objective manner without loaded phrases so that maybe the MSM will pick this up and maybe convince more people than would otherwise be the case.

Posted by: zapporop on March 4, 2005 08:37 PM

14. Cliff - I agree with the statement. No argument. The $64k question is how do we help people understand that their constitutional rights are being ripped off? I have listened to people that geniunely believe that asking for ID at the polls is too much (WTF?). That cleaning the voter rolls is too damn radical and rightwing (WTF Deuce). How do you combat that level of stupidity? When you start dropping bombs from the B-52's, leftwingers and even moderates turn off. But look at Stefan's success. It's hard to ignore just cold hard facts.

Posted by: zapporo on March 4, 2005 08:48 PM

15. I love it! "Task Force on Symbolic Gestures et al." LOL!

Posted by: Michele on March 4, 2005 09:30 PM

16. While the EFF report is based on the facts, it is clearly rhetorical spin and lacking overall balance.

This may be OK for partizans, but I doubt it will hold up in Wenatchee or be taken seriously by the MSM.

If 3,500 plus illegal votes is not enough to negate the election, then what is? If five months isn't enough time to gather enough evidence, then what is enough?

Its time to S**T or get off the pot.

Posted by: DeadWood on March 4, 2005 09:43 PM

17. WHen it comes to this election we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg. What the court sees or will accept as evidence is but a small fraction of what has been going for years in KC. Things I know of from talking to people. West Seattle has had people handing out absentee ballots and told to mail them in 2000 election. Our Secretary of State's Office was informed of the problem and was ignored. I bet it never left the secretaries desk. Those in charge only see what is given to them. There are many levels of goverment that separate what happens in the county to what gets to the Olympia. Each layer controlled by who. Appointed people, Relatives of Senators and Representatives. Those people who have a stake at keeping their jobs by not being looked by an can we say an independent audit. Most of the comments in this report can not be proven or be accepted by a court of law. Too many people in this state will only hear what the Seattle times Says as they slant the news. It is up to everyone else to let the truth be known. The hard facts that no one can explain away. Plus History of voting irregularities. I wonder how many other elections were stolen by the great KC election process. In action and sloppiness can add a lot of votes to the choosen party. ANd we all know where KC's bread is buttered. Even if we dont win we still have to ensure everyone knows that election reforms discussed in Olympia today will only continue the stealing of close elections. Prevention of voters to be heard. KC could say East KC signatures dont match so we cant count their vote in any election. That could happen Tough standards for signature verification in non democrat voting precincts and sloppy standards in democrat precincts can really make an entire mail in election change. Mail in elections is like saying the state voted 99% for the democrats because they are the ones who deciede who has a right to vote. Sadam just killed those who voted against him. Here they just throw the vote away like all the miltary votes.

Posted by: David Anfinrud on March 5, 2005 12:17 AM

18. Now wait a minute.

Dean Logan himself sent me a card in the mail today with the website that lets me read the 2004 Elections Report. I am sure that it will be the truth and extrememly informative. What more do I need? (www.metrokc.gov/elections)

I mean, he wouldn't lie to me or something, would he?

Posted by: Elmo on March 5, 2005 01:49 AM

19. Grampa always said, 'You can tell when an election year is here again, the price of WhiteWash doubles!'

Posted by: Arky on March 5, 2005 05:01 AM

20. Wow! Is there a slant…absolutely…but its okay! Bottom line KC and Gregiore bought the election…if ya can’t get it fair and square…steal it! All conditions were present and ripe for such an event. In spite of the political slant (even I my favor), a comprehensive review, thanks EFF.

As for Zapporo…I too was taken slightly aback at the “pile” line. It took reading the rest of the report to forget about it. Better lingo could have been used.

Micajah….if the House, Senate, Governorship and the (most) Courts are controlled by one party ...in who’s favor would any rational person assume their decisions would come down on? Right, wrong, or indifferent, HAVA was in place, the rules were in place and our left leaning (to the point of back breaking) High Court should have considered same. It seems they did not consider the Federal aspect..maybe because it ws not politically expedient. Hmmm....

Posted by: R.W. Nut on March 5, 2005 08:44 AM

21. Good report. I'm glad SOMEONE is looking at the entire system and process with a critical eye instead of glossing over what was clearly a fraudulant elections.

I don't see how Gregoire can live with herself. She ought to announce that she wants a new election too.

Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on March 5, 2005 09:07 AM

22. It is amazing that no one has pointed out a simple and very obvious fact. The Secretary of State was ordered by law to implement reforms to Washington State voting procedures in the Summer of 2004. He did not.

Why? Because then he and the Democratic Party of Washington would NOT have been able to manipulate the results of the election to match their desire for a certain outcome.

Why has no one called for the prosecution of the Sec. State?

Posted by: Dianna on March 5, 2005 10:45 AM

23. The EFF's report is real something, but hardly a "deal."

page 9: "At least 1,108 convicted felons, whose voter rights had not been restored, voted."

The cited source: Modie, Neil "Who won illegal votes of felons?" Seattle Post-Intelligencer 23 Feb, 2005

In said article: "Republicans said in court papers yesterday that at least 1,108 felons voted illegally, as did at least 55 other voters -- a total more than eight times as large as Gregoire's 129-vote margin of victory over Rossi in a hand recount."

So if you get quoted in a newspaper, you get to point to the newspaper as your source? Hardly the "real deal".

Posted by: pen on March 5, 2005 11:08 AM

24. ..making my way through this report. It's amazing how many laws etc. were just not followed or ignored or not dealt with but should have been, etc.!
What are these elections officials thinking???

And it was very interesting to hear the interview on Republican Radio today of a democrat talking about how Ron Sims forced into retirement a very ethical elections official and put in scuzzy people instead and turned the department into a democrat-advantaged operation instead of a non-partisan operation. where is the outrage??

It's time for Sims to go.

Posted by: Michele on March 5, 2005 01:47 PM

25. zapporo,

The MSM will never pick this type of report up no matter how sensitive the headline is. They are too far in bed with the Democrat Party and I applaud EFF for going over their heads and taking this factual report directly to the voters.

So in other words F@#$ the MSM.

Posted by: No Phony's Allowed on March 5, 2005 02:10 PM

26. I read the entire Report, and it took awhile. I went from one 'sickening feeling' to another. How can this be? Regardless of who was "certified" the winner, the entire process is so 'flawed' that any winner is not credible.

The results of the 2004 election (at least for Govrenor) should be thrown out.

It certainly appears that the Democrat strategy was to recount as many times as necessary; then when a recount gave the desired results, to declare that all counting stop and the winner be declared.

Posted by: Dave on March 5, 2005 03:18 PM

27. Micajah
dkpcowboy

The EFF report says that, due to shortness of time, the Supremes relied heavily on the positions presented by the attorneys arguing the case.

The report then says that these positions were based on the old RCW, which was superseded by the new RCW enacted to implement HAVA.

For the sake of argument, let us assume that these EFF statements are true. If so, then the Supremes gave a ruling based on law that is no longer in force. If so, then that ruling does not speak to the law now actually in effect. If so, then the statement by EFF that the votes were illegally counted may be correct (assuming, of course, that EFF's interpretation of the new RCW is correct).

This type of situation must have arisen before, if only infrequently. Does anyone know how these have been resolved?

Posted by: ewaggin on March 5, 2005 05:50 PM

28. Stolen!

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 5, 2005 08:23 PM

29. Incredible!

Reading through the listing of everything as it occurred during the November elections - really gives me chills!

I was especially stunned at the lack of voter registration verification! I know we found hundreds of voters (registered in 2004) with residences listed at government buildings (King County Admin building for one)....and their mailing addresses in other countries ie; Canada, France, Italy, Israel,etc...but I always thought there was a method in place to verify these new voters citizenship! To now find out that there was virtually NO verification of voter eligiblity in King County and others is sickening!

With so much negative influence from Europe during our 2004 Presidential elections - to think that some rabid socialists from France could negate my valid vote by registering and voting in King County from afar - without fear of being discovered - makes me ill! Thanks to the liberals - the WORLD was able to vote in our US elections via King County!
And then there are the non-citizens who were allowed to register to vote with their drivers license registration! How corrupt is that??
How about all of our *illegal aliens* in this state?
Do people realize that there are tens of thousands of illegal aliens hiding out in the state of Washington? What is going to stop them from voting illegally? Especially if they believe their freedom in this state depends on a certain party gaining office? What if that party assured them that no one would verify their eligibility? They could! Because NO ONE verified the new registered voters!

We are hearing of Moveon.org voter registration collectors telling felons lies about their eligibility to vote......what if they also had a script for illegals?

I think this report - as damning as it is - also may have opened up more cans of worms....

Posted by: Deborah on March 5, 2005 08:29 PM

30. Using the figures form the EFF report I found the error rate in this election now appears to be more than 3.66% A far cry from .02%. More errors and illegal votes will be inevitable so I expect this error rate to go up to almost 5% once voting fraud from elderly and assisted care facilities plus illegal alien voters are validated and added.

Posted by: Mark Beyer on March 6, 2005 02:21 AM

31. if the House, Senate, Governorship and the (most) Courts are controlled by one party ...in who’s favor would any rational person assume their decisions would come down on? Right, wrong, or indifferent, HAVA was in place, the rules were in place and our left leaning (to the point of back breaking) High Court should have considered same.
What amazes me here, if you change the word Govenor to President, you have exactly what the Dems are screaming about in the rest of the country. What is even scarier, is that there is no sympathy for the People in the Conyers report out of Ohio. If you are really outraged about the possibility of voter fraud. compare the two states and see which you think is more disturbing. even if you wish to say the numbers wouldn't have made a difference, the actions are frightening. Worry more about control of one party in the country than just the state, it costs a lot more there.

Posted by: danw on March 6, 2005 03:10 PM

32. As we've always heard "Ignorance of the law is no excuse".
So does our States highest court go to the bench and not understand the latest laws regarding the issues?
Call the next witness!

Posted by: Keith on March 6, 2005 10:08 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:

Remember info?