King County has steadfastly refused to release the names of the now 96 absentee voters whose ballots were not counted last November. But I now have some names. Based on best available information from other King County documents, this weekend I determined with reasonable certainty the names of 30 of the disenfranchised voters. I've also narrowed down most of the others to a field of 272. This spreadsheet lists the names. [6/19: The spreadsheet has been updated to reflect the names confirmed by King County] (Details on how I came up with these names and on King County's initial refusal to confirm them in the extended entry)
Among the apparently disenfranchised voters are all three voters in the Stansbury family of Bellevue -- Todd and Wendy Stansbury, who are Republican activists, and their son, Lance Corporal Kenneth Stansbury. Lance Corporal Stansbury was on active duty in Iraq most of last fall. His parents flew him home from California where he was then stationed so he could make sure he cast his ballot in time to be counted before he returned to Iraq. County records show that the Stansburys' ballots arrived on time and that they were credited with voting. Pending King County's release of the full list of uncounted ballots, we're left to conclude from the available evidence that the Stansburys' ballots were not counted. I happened to meet Wendy Stansbury at the county Republican convention on Saturday and had the unfortunate duty to inform her of her family's apparent disenfranchisement. Needless to say, she was upset by this news.
Please check the list to see if you or anybody you know is included. If your name is on the list, you might want to contact Dean Logan at 206-296-1540, dean.logan@metrokc.gov, and ask him to release the list of all of the uncounted ballots so you can confirm whether or not your ballot was one of the 96. It wouldn't hurt to also contact your King County Councilmember and your state legislators.
UPDATE: King County released the names of the disenfranchised voters on Thursday, June 16. The Seattle Times posted the list.
How did I compile this list of names? In early April, after the uncounted ballots were first disclosed, King County released a report documenting the batch numbers where the first 93 uncounted ballots were found and the precincts the voters came from. The original report was followed by a supplement a few days later documenting the 94th ballot. For example, the main report stated that batch #248 contained 3 ballots from precinct BEL 41-0220. I cross-checked these batch/precinct counts against the main absentee ballot file also released by King County. It listed exactly 3 ballots from precint BEL 41-0220 in batch 248 -- those of the Stansbury family. Where the numbers of ballots in a given precinct and batch in the absentee ballot file exactly matched the number of uncounted ballots in that precinct and batch in the reports, I concluded that the specific voters are indeed the voters whose ballots weren't counted. Those are the "matching" voters whose names are highlighted in yellow in the spreadsheet. In other cases, the report indicates, for example, that there was one uncounted ballot in batch 248 from precinct BEL 41-0102. The absentee ballot file shows 4 such voters. I listed all 4 of those voters in the spreadsheet as "possible" matches.
I first requested the complete list of disenfranchised voters in a public records request on April 7. King County denied the request on April 13, but suggested that the names might be released during the course of the Borders litigation. For whatever reason, the names have still not been released.
I sent the spreadsheet with the names to King County Election officials over the weekend to give them an opportunity to respond before I posted it. Spokeswoman Bobbie Egan e-mailed me a reply on Sunday. They're still not releasing an official list of names on advice of the King County Prosecuting Attorney. No legal justification was cited for the Prosecutor's advice. I suspect the justification is political, not legal. It's easier to sweep such problems under the rug when you have 96 uncounted ballots than when you have 96 individual voters who are pissed as hell and demanding that people be held accountable for failing to count their ballots.
Not just republican voters among the 96 uncounted ballots..but ACTIVIST Republican voters!
Just another in-your-face criminal action by the liberals in last Novembers election! They are a twisted cult.....
Posted by: Deborah on June 13, 2005 12:41 AMCan't be very high given the explanation by the county of how these 96 ballots went uncounted.
It would be interesting to find out if any of the Stansbury family have links to King County Elections. For example did any of them run/file for Republican PCO in the last few years?
I would also ask the prosecutors office if they were indeed solicited for advice in the case of the 96 ballots. The elections office has made some "misstatements" in the last 6 months involving their relationship with the prosecutors office (see MSM stories about investigation of illegal voters).
If they really did consult the prosecutors what was the actual advice. There is a big difference between "you don't have to disclose the names" and "you should not disclose the names" Maybe there are still emails or memo's that address this subject that can be retrieved.
The main thing that we have learned from Logan and the elections office over the last 6 months is when there is smoke there is a fire. Meaning there is a bigger reason they are withholding the list of the 96 and I am willing to bet it has nothing to do with the advice of the prosecutors office.
Posted by: Joe on June 13, 2005 01:09 AMI googled this site for an absentee ballot report (file, spreadsheet, etc,) and could not locate one. I cannot reconcile the above statements. I cannot understand how comparing numbers in two reports arrives at names. I am not saying I disbelieve you (as you tend to document everything), it’s just that I like to put two and two together myself. Can you provide a link or a more in depth explanation?
I think that any of these voters, whose votes were not counted, would still have grounds for a suit based on a violation of civil rights (disenfranchisement), providing that they had the will or means to pursue it. I would think the evidence in the election contest would be sufficient to show a disregard for (a violation of) the law causing the disenfranchisement. KCED has a duty to know and abide by the laws of this state.
"I think that any of these voters, whose votes were not counted, would still have grounds for a suit based on a violation of civil rights (disenfranchisement), providing that they had the will or means to pursue it."
I'd guess that's exactly why KCED doesn't want the names released. A civil rights suit would be a federal matter, especially given that there is almost certainly at least one active duty military member involved. (Did they ever find 2LT Bryan Suits' ballot?)
The last thing KCED wants is the US attorney poking around.
Posted by: Heartless Libertarian on June 13, 2005 04:16 AM129 - 96 (disenfranchised Rep. Voters) = 33
Hmm, could this be the reason for the voter scrutiny weeks prior to the election. Ms. May? Where were you!?
Frankly, Judge Bridges should have DEMANDED this information @ the START of the proceeding!
Can you imagine ruling on a vote challange WITHOUT knowing ALL the FACTS? (DNC read TRUTH)
Can you imagine when the pettitions bring this matter to the Supeme Court!?
I love it when the American Constitution is PROVEN right AGAIN!! Of the People, By the People and For the People!
Stefan,
The American Way of life is in your debt!
Keep the Faith.
Keep up the pressure.
I hate quotiing a silly show but, THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!
No, it doesn't suprise me, I just find it odd that I thought I was one of the only five Republican's in the city :) Guess there's six of us!
-Thomas
Posted by: thomas on June 13, 2005 06:34 AMSo, losing the election challenge was not the end game. It is cleaning up the election system that is the goal. Keep that in mind.
Posted by: swatter on June 13, 2005 07:16 AM"I wouldn't believe you if you told me the sky is blue."
This just proves the point that you democrats wouldn't believe the truth if it hit you in the face. Everyone knows the sky is blue....everyone knows Dino won!
Posted by: nwbarb on June 13, 2005 07:24 AMHave you checked the polling place voter rolls to see if any of these people are credited for voting in person. I mean if they are credited for voting in person wouldn't there absentee ballots have to "conviently" disappear and not get counted?
Posted by: TrueSoldier on June 13, 2005 07:30 AMOn a more serious note, the problem with allowing Bridge's decision to stand unchallenged or to appeal it to the Supreme Court is the potential misguided precedence it sets. A trial court decision has no precedential value, whereas a ruling by an appellate court does. Although I believe Bridge's ruling was terribly flawed and an incorrect reading and application of statutes and caselaw, the built in disadvantage of an appellant and the difficult standard for overturning "findings of fact," is cause for caution in appealing this particular decision. Better to leave it out there as another poor trial court decision without future impact on a proper reading and application of Washington's election contest statutes, than to risk creating "bad law" by an appellate court that is hampered when needing to make a close call on the facts and law.
Posted by: Alaskaboy on June 13, 2005 07:38 AMWhy do so many of you leftists & Democrats (like you Scott) hate Democracy so much & are pleased with this election stolen from the voters of Washington State?
When the main goal of my party is to win and win at any cost, the goal is pretty clear. We don't have to play fair, because you guys are mean and cruel and don't care for us. You expect us to work to earn a living, while we want everyone to get a decent salary and bennies, whether we work or not.
So, when we control the election machine, we control the election machine. After all, "he who has the gold, makes the rules"- an old Washington State regulatory motto from the 70s.
How am I doing so far, Scott?
Posted by: swatter on June 13, 2005 08:10 AMHe writes of several reforms, one of which I share below:
"The State will systematically purge the voter rolls of felons, the deceased and non-citizens. Continuous updates against databases of the Department of Corrections, Department of Health, the State Patrol and other agencies will maintain the accuracy of our rolls. This will be aided by a statewide voter database that will go into effect Jan 1."
Now conspiracy freaks would say the beta test done in King County is now ready and they will call it the first pogrom of the People's Republic of Washington.
Sigh...
Personally I find the reform stating how... "the Secretary of State will reinstate rigorous audits....:" Odd wording in that "rigorous" was not a word used by the SecState this morning on KTTH.
More important than making "heads roll," though, is figuring out how the ballots went uncounted and adopting appropriate procedures to reduce the odds that ballots are missed in the future.
Stefan, or anybody else, how does a ballot wind up in a given batch?
Posted by: Northern Coho on June 13, 2005 08:27 AM"Dammit, I'm sure disappointed in myself. This KC Elections system, which I run, is in a shambles. I'm such a moron for running such a lax ship. If I didn't need this job, I'd fire myself."
Is that what youre saying Dean?
What was that little idea "Taxation without Representation" that they used to teach in schools? Do they still teach it?
Posted by: otto on June 13, 2005 08:55 AMWe need a refreshing of the information re the 13 or 14 ?? instances of 'newly found' ballots - the dates found relative to the first count and re(new)counts - the number of found votes and which precints they were from - I do not remember seeing any analysis of this information - has it been done??? just getting all the fragmented info on these votes together in one place may be helpful --
Also -- how much is known re the enhanced ballots - which precints did they come from? -- how did they tilt? Johnny Carson's Karnack the Magnificent comes to mind here with the a$$holes holding ballots up along side of their heads and devining the 'intent' of the voter - that G-D crap is total fraud - if the voter is so damn dumb/illiterate/ignorant/'no speaka da inglish'/mentally feeble/incapacitated etc etc - that they cannot properly fill out the ballot - the DAMN ballot should be thrown out - they should not have been voting in the first place -- for any reason above - just the fact they are that incapable means that they are not capable of casting anything that remotely resembles an informed vote - the pure DemocRAT voter --- WAIT -- HOLD THE TRAIN -- I am so dumb -- the dufus voter would in fact be informed - by the democRAT/moveon operatives as to how to vote -- "thats right - just put your mark there-- we will ensure that it is counted" (if necessary - wink wink)
A prediction -- this list is currently being shopped out to the demos that were 'salted' in - and they will be popping outta the woodwork like roaches over the next couple days -- just to blurr the impact of this 'new' revelation - they will declare how disappointed they are at having been 'disenfrancised' but will state that they will just accept the results and not create a stir - how big of them!!
The trial setup for the Hillary fix is so far on track and full speed ahead -- proven to work out just fine right here in 'River City'
Posted by: Bill on June 13, 2005 09:03 AMIt amazes me to think how three ballots from the same family can be "misplaced" at the same time unless they put a rubber band around them so they wouldn't get "lost" in the mail.
I will be attending the commissioners meeting this afternoon. I will not make a difference because the "two" commissioners will vote to go absentee. Maybe that is how they plan on winning the next election.
Mel
At what point do we plug in the whole DOJ threatened lawsuit re: military ballots? I know mine got counted because I e-mailed Sims, Logan, and basically the entire WA chain of command demanding a sitrep as of 16 or 17 november, and finally got back some low-level email basically stating, "your vote was counted". No further info. I think that maybe mine was set aside to not be counted and they looked at the cc: list and decided to count it, though that sounds a little tin foil hattish.
Posted by: Aaron on June 13, 2005 10:22 AMAnyway have a read:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002332124_teamgregoire13m.html
PS...Great picture of the campaign promise liar too!
The hand count was managed with a desired outcome in mind, that being the election of our current illegitimate governor. The people of Washington spoke in the election of 2004, but it was the King County elections office that was heard.
I wonder if the Feds would finally get involved if every single one of the 96 uncounted votes turned out to be for Rossi.
Also, the ability to finagle with absentee ballots should motivate us to go to the polls to vote.
Posted by: Susu on June 13, 2005 11:19 AMIs it just me or does Fraudoire look enough like Alfred E. (What - Me Worry!!!) Newman to be his sister?? - come to think of it Al's been around for so long - daughter??
Hey -- as if anyone really needs another reason to drop a subscription to the slimes - yesterdays' travel section has an article by Carol Pucci about the coffee houses in Krakow, Poland -- she went "to spend a few days exploring Krakow's burgeoning coffehouse culture." Duh and double duh - what the 'ell - who gives a rat's a$$ about that - wow - some tourist destination -- now before anyone thinks I am saying something against Poland/Polish people/immigrants and/or their descendents -- no way - I couldn't give a rat's a$$ about any coffehouse in any of several of my ancestor's motha countries or anyplace across the US where they have all lived over the last 200+ years -- no what is shown here is the utter stupidity and in-your-face crap from the MSM - where they will spend thousands of dollars to send someone to Krakow, Poland for several days just to write a puff piece about some totally unimportant subject while the local 'rats are robbing us blind.
Posted by: Bill on June 13, 2005 11:21 AMBrianD -- refer to earlier posts of mine this morning - the goobered up votes would certainly include a 'salting' of demo votes - no way are all 96 votes rep votes -- maybe 70-80% - the 'rats will have enuff demo's that were disenfranchised that they can trot out to show that 'everone was fairly treated' - ala the 4 felon Rep votes - total crap - where is all their "COUNT EVERY VOTE" BS -- the SOB's pulled offa SCAM - PERIOD - it is clearer and clearer to me that this was not just a series of 'unfortunate' mistakes -- IT WAS PURE, UNADULTERATED FRAUD -- SET UP VERY 'SOPHISTICATEDLY' to look like a few mistakes -- distributed vote fraud --
Posted by: Bill on June 13, 2005 11:37 AMWe are looking at joining a possible lawsuit.
Posted by: wendy stansbury on June 13, 2005 11:47 AMhttp://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/209498
"Von Reichbauer wants the convention process reviewed, because the date conflicted with school graduations, delegates couldn't vote by absentee ballot and soldiers fighting overseas couldn't participate."
Posted by: JDB on June 13, 2005 11:58 AMDidn't the legislature just take that option away? Maybe I missed some details, but I thought they were making Washington like Oregon, with NO polling voting.
Posted by: Dogbert on June 13, 2005 12:02 PMRossi's REAL lead in the first count probably would have been by several thousands if not for the obvious demo/moveon crap - come on now KC - "can't we just COUNT EVERY VOTE???"
Posted by: Bill on June 13, 2005 12:30 PMIf these folks were truly disenfranchised, there is serious trouble brewing. It transfers the issue from the political to the criminal arena.
It would appear the Stansbury's have the financial wherewithall to lodge a seious lawsuit.
Posted by: Ken Muller on June 13, 2005 12:44 PMThe ballots "found" by King County were in all Gregoire precincts except one, the ballots "lost" by King County were in all Rossi precincts except one. Heck of a coincidence I guess, just like its a coincidence the Stansbury's were in the votes not counted. Lets just say probabilities are getting into the infinitesimal range. File it under the category of "no evidence" evidence.
But, no worries, Logan is on it. I have 100% confidence this will be "addressed" by the next election.
Posted by: Marc on June 13, 2005 12:56 PMSTEFAN:
The similarities and connections between the WA public elections and the Seattle labor union's membership elections are very eerie.
Go to
www.corrupt-union.com
and read:
THE SILVER BULLET; THE SILVER BULLET 2; and THE HAC REPORT 3.
One would wonder if the labor unions in Seattle are REALLY behind all of this election fraud in our state?
Posted by: Apeman on June 13, 2005 12:58 PMSTEFAN:
The similarities and connections between the WA public elections and the Seattle labor union's membership elections are very eerie.
Go to
www.corrupt-union.com
and read:
THE SILVER BULLET; THE SILVER BULLET 2; and THE HAC REPORT 3.
One would wonder if the labor unions in Seattle are REALLY behind all of this election fraud in our state?
Posted by: Apeman on June 13, 2005 12:58 PMIt's certainly not going to happen as a result of msm activist frenzy.
Posted by: scott158 on June 13, 2005 01:15 PMYou do amuse, you surely do.
Military voters tend to vote Republican by a large majority. No way the GOP would mess with that, no matter what you read in a King County publication.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 13, 2005 01:25 PMthe best way to 'encourage the US DA to get involved would probably be to send letters directly to AG Gonzalez. He's the big boss. Unless you live in Reichert's district, I doubt letters to your rep or either of our senators asking them to ask Gonzo why no investigation is taking place would get any results.
Absent that, step one would be a FOIA request for the names. If they don't comply, then you'd have to get a court order to get them to cough it up.
Once you've got the names, get someone one the list to make a civil rights complaint. The more the merrier in this case.
I'm not sure how much investigative latitude the US DA's office would have in a case like this.
Posted by: Heartless Libertarian on June 13, 2005 01:26 PMThat's exactly my focus. Like I said, it's easy for King County to sweep all of these issues under the rug when people stop caring about them. I don't want to let that happen until Sims, Logan et al, come clean, end the cover-ups and have a complete airing of their mistakes.
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on June 13, 2005 01:38 PMCounty Auditor Bobbie Gagner stated with the new ballots, voters will have more security and fraud will be more difficult( the "security flap" will make the difference). I stated that one of my concerns is the fact that my vote is not annonymous. Her reply was "only the Auditor's office employees would know"
How reassuring.
Mel
It is generally recognized that one of the best ways of preventing crime is to prosecute criminals.
Posted by: Bostonian on June 13, 2005 02:50 PM‘I stated that one of my concerns is the fact that my vote is not annonymous. Her reply was "only the Auditor's office employees would know"’
ARTICLE VI
ELECTIONS AND ELECTIVE RIGHTS
SECTION 6 BALLOT.
All elections shall be by ballot. The legislature shall provide for such method of voting as will secure to every elector absolute secrecy in preparing and depositing his ballot.
Anyway, it occurred to me on the drive home, was she saying that even if you go to the polls to vote, you would still have to have your name attached to your ballot? "Security flap" or not, that seems like the complete lack of a secret ballot.
Posted by: RookieRick on June 13, 2005 02:59 PMRemember the comment made by I believe Commissioner Oliver when I stated that three member of the Stanbury family's ballots were never counted? "Yes, but that happened in King County" was his reply. Do they think that we are THAT stupid?
Mel
King County's records do not indicate that his ballot was ever received. The most likely explanation is that it was lost by either the post office, or by PSI, the company that pre-processes the ballots before they go to MBOS
Posted by: Stefan Sharkansky on June 13, 2005 03:19 PMLook at Holiday Lake's voting patterns. Bush wins. Rossi wins. Votes disappear.
Posted by: Unicorn on June 13, 2005 03:24 PMDino was robbed. A strong majority in this state know it. How do you have 785 ballots belonging to NO ONE not affect the election?
Posted by: Michele on June 13, 2005 03:30 PM...the definition of which is clearly variable depending upon political affiliation...
The response of the left/dems etc to a call to clean things up and move on is all about having the appearance of doing something about PROCEDURES in the future while actually making the problem worse. No mention of the people involved.
The response on the part of the right/reps begins with a call to clear out those involved, and hold them legally accountable, if appropriate. Creating REAL change in the laws is a separate function.
And how can those who were responsible for the existing mess have any part of the solution, except as an example of what can happen to future potential miscreants?
"Moving on" must include addressing both concerns...people AND processes. With the full use of legal sanctions.
Posted by: scott158 on June 13, 2005 03:41 PM'Lost in the mail' - right -- like the dog ate my homework --- duh
Other inquiries - please expand on PSI - who are they - what does PSI stand for - WHO OWNS the company -- PSI "the company that preprocesses ballots before they go to MBOS???"" - what is MBOS?? what does PSI do in the course of "preposessing the ballots" ?? - Thanks for any light you can shed on this
Posted by: Bill on June 13, 2005 03:45 PMhear, hear!
Don't forget Brightwater... disingenuous creep!
I also highly suspect that Gregoire will Scoop up Ron Sims if he is ousted, and most likely to impliment (screw over) the rest of the state with a state wide CAO.
They are stupid enough to do this and do not realize the hatred this has fested by rural King County land owners who have had their land stolen by this Jerk Sims and his democratic honchos.
Gregoire will continue to screw the people of this state by making Ron Sims her henchman to steal more tax payer dollars, rights and land.
Posted by: GS on June 13, 2005 04:32 PMYet another reason to not go to all-mail voting.
Posted by: Dogbert on June 13, 2005 04:44 PMI don't see any names from say, Freemont, or Belltown, on the list.
Funny how that happens. Oh, but wait, that pinhead from the Seattle Times says that you can't dray any conclusions from evidence like this!
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on June 13, 2005 05:11 PMGetting that list of 96 disenfranchised voters nailed down is important. Next, finding out who they voted for.
The "authorities" and "officials" in the state will never do anything about it, but perhaps it will convince a few more voters that these Democrats from King County need to be sent packing.
Posted by: BananaLand (aka Iguana) on June 13, 2005 05:36 PMTo wit;
Any person saying they are eligible is registered.
Any vote received by absentee, regular, or provisional, is counted.
Any challenge to the voter's registration must come in before an election.
Any challenge to a voter's eligibility to have cast a vote requires (and deduction thereof) must contain the name of the person who actually cast the ballot, which races the voter cast votes in, and what those votes were. The fact that ballots are secret, untraceable, and not able to be accounted for by the state constitution is not the fault of the courts, candidates, government, or voters.
And YOUR elected officials ALL want it that way. Don't blame me. You put them there, and that's what they say you want.
And, to top it all off, some parties held caucuses recently, to choose the approved candidates to run in the September primary, at which time the parties seek to restrict your access and ability to vote for whomever you want. YOUR elected officials, which YOU put into office, and YOUR parties are representing YOU in limiting your choice. They say that THEIR rights trump YOURS.
But hey, it's ok. They are representing YOU!
Think you'll get a comment from Lovick? Think that Gregoire cares what you think? Think Sims gives a hoot about what you want? Try writing them, and report back on what response you get. After all, why should they kowtow to you? You only put them there. And they feel that once ensconced in office, they are free to do unto you that which they desire, regardless of what you think. After all, they are representing you. (In their minds)
Notice that Vance is pretty quiet these days. Probably distracted and busy trying to sue us voters out here. Oh well.
That's the state of the state today, folks. And we thought we had something going on when Sheriff George Janovich was racketeering! Wow! These people take it to new heights.
That's ok, we can trust the feds to keep us protected, right?
(sigh)
Posted by: Disgruntled on June 13, 2005 06:10 PMThe monies collected through the new gas tax, meant to reduce congestion will now be spent on animal bridges for I90.
"Highway purposes."
Posted by: Patches Pal on June 13, 2005 06:59 PM
I've been checking my precinct call lists from working the Reichert campaign last fall....(no comments please..) I haven't found any name matches yet - but the lists are made up mainly of Kent area residents...
I don't expect anyone in this state to feel truly satisfied about our election process until the Feds investigate... If we, as ordinary citizens, can find this many descrepancies, errors, and fraud from the outside.....one can only imagine what Federal investigation would uncover!
King County got lazy and cocky!...They knew how to pull it off..but they don't know how to clean it up!
Posted by: Deborah on June 13, 2005 08:22 PMyeah, of course they knew how to pull it up, but who in their right mind would even begin to think that they would clean it up???
They want all of us to just go away so they can finish sweeping it under the rug. Then, they'll just go back to business as usual.
I'm not encouraged that we will see the feds involved. They don't want to upset the apple cart.
It would appear the Feds are already looking into King County on RICO charges filed last month....
Here's a snippet...I wonder if the Feds have made up their mind whether to investigate or not?
You would think with this many complaints being filed against a certain county in the state..the Feds would have to start wondering....
http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/207896
Critics file racketeering suit against county
2005-05-25
by Dean A. Radford
Journal Reporter
King County is operating as a criminal enterprise, two outspoken critics claim in a racketeering complaint they will file with the FBI in Seattle today.
The complaint chronicles oft-heard charges against the county's code enforcement officers and about the surface water management fee that officials have already addressed.
The complaint also will cite the county's controversial, but successful efforts to develop the East Lake Sammamish Trail on the Eastside.
But it's the rural backlash against the package of critical areas ordinances that finally drove Chuck Pillon of May Valley and Ron Ewart of Fall City to prepare the complaint.
A spokeswoman for King County Executive Ron Sims said the accusations are ``totally without merit.''
Next, the FBI will decide whether there's any reason to investigate the charges under the federal racketeering regulations, known as RICO, or Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
``We are alleging the county is operating a criminal racketeering enterprise,'' Ewart said.
He and Pillon have evidence and witnesses to support their claims, but Ewart offered no details. No one, he said, ``has shined the light of day'' on county operations.
Posted by: Deborah on June 13, 2005 08:45 PMThe initiative would require a 'recall' election anytime the standard number of signatures are gathered for an initiative to recall. This way the inititive would be law this fall and we could be done with Fraudiore by February with the following initiative.
Am I high or could this have worked?
Posted by: Andy on June 13, 2005 09:27 PMJustice needs to be served for the good of the people and we should demand NO LESS ! Maybe some individual lawsuits about this election can be brought to the Supreme Court also. Shawn Newman Esq. said this morning on KTTH that he believes that there would be a viable case for the Stansburys if they desire. Tenacity here will pay off - the only ones who are defeated are those who quit...
Posted by: KS on June 13, 2005 09:32 PMpossible 1945 ALDERWOOD BURKE SUZY W WOODINVILLE
I may be totally off on this, but I think a Suzy Burke, who is of a prominent real estate Burke family, was a big Rossi donor and support, possibly even a finance committee member.
I think she is Susie Burke though so I maybe way off base. It isn't that uncommon of a name.
Has anyone tried to compare this list with PDC reports???
Not that it matters at this point but if 57% of people think Dino won now, what will this bombshell do to that???
Posted by: T.J. on June 13, 2005 09:36 PMAt any rate, that particular law suite does not have much to do with investigating election fraud.
Posted by: BananaLand(aka Iguana) on June 13, 2005 09:43 PMYes, I know that particular RICO charge hasn't anything to do with election fraud....but the heat is definitely on in King County with respect to Federal complaints!
Remember Slade Gorton and the Republicans on the King County Council also called for a federal investigation into King County elections? I can't imagine Gonzales ignoring Gortons concerns...
And what is up with Emily Langlies statement about McKay wanting complaints about the election to be directed to the FBI? Is he saying that complaints should be filed exclusively with the FBI as opposed to the USDOJ?
Here's a snippet of that story:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002233762_election07m.html
Thursday, April 7, 2005 - Page updated at 12:00 a.m.
Slade Gorton calls for criminal probe of election
By Keith Ervin
Seattle Times staff reporter
Slade Gorton critical of governor's election
Former U.S. Sen. Slade Gorton yesterday joined the call for a criminal investigation of King County's handling of the November election, even as county officials acknowledged a breakdown in the process for accounting for absentee ballots.
Gorton, appearing at a news conference with state Republican Chairman Chris Vance, said the U.S. Department of Justice or some other agency should conduct an investigation. He said he didn't know if any criminal acts were committed in the county's failure to count 93 valid absentee ballots in the tight governor's election in November.
The mistake could have been fraud or "colossal incompetence," he said.
The six Republicans on the Metropolitan King County Council on Monday asked U.S. Attorney General Albert Gonzales to order an investigation of the election. The seven Democrats called for an outside audit of the elections office.
Emily Langlie, spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney John McKay in Seattle, said McKay has told people requesting a federal investigation to contact the FBI
Andy,
ARTICLE I
DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 33 RECALL OF ELECTIVE OFFICERS.
Every elective public officer of the state of Washington expect [except] judges of courts of record is subject to recall and discharge by the legal voters of the state, or of the political subdivision of the state, from which he was elected whenever a petition demanding his recall, reciting that such officer has committed some act or acts of malfeasance or misfeasance while in office, or who has violated his oath of office, stating the matters complained of, signed by the percentages of the qualified electors thereof, hereinafter provided, the percentage required to be computed from the total number of votes cast for all candidates for his said office to which he was elected at the preceding election, is filed with the officer with whom a petition for nomination, or certificate for nomination, to such office must be filed under the laws of this state, and the same officer shall call a special election as provided by the general election laws of this state, and the result determined as therein provided. [AMENDMENT 8, 1911 p 504 Section 1. Approved November, 1912.]
Just think of the cozy setup - SCAM - the damn democRATS would have with party registration and all mail voting - lets see here: -- hold back 10 thou Rep votes and 2 thou 'RAT votes (just to keep the salt shaker loaded - wink wink) -- election turns out a 'tie' - recount needed - at this point an 8000 vote Rep lead has been hidden i.e. doesnot exist -- then comes the recount - find 2000 votes - say 1000 Reps and 1000 'Rats - and poof - still a tie - hand recount time -- OK -- another 500 votes surfaces - 200 rep and 300 'RATS -- voila - the RAT wins by 100 -- sound familiar???? and still 700 'Rat votes and 8800 Rep votes in the cellar!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Bill on June 14, 2005 08:09 AMIn absentee balloting, there are ways that my ballot can be identified to my information, allowing for some mischief. Absentees can be stolen. Absentees can be lost in the mail - ask Brian Suits. Absentees can be mishandled - ask King, Snohomish or Pierce Counties.
With the problems that occurred in the last election, I will not trust the government with all mail in ballots for a long time.
I would prefer to see touch screen machines at polling places that allow you multiple opportunities to correct your ballot. When you are done, the machine prints a ballot form for you to put into the accuvote or ballot box. Results of the ballot box can be compared with the machine for accuracy and reconciliation.
IMHO the fewer "touches" in the process, the fewer the amount of errors that could (and do) occur. All mail balloting just adds too many extra steps which invites error or mischief - see military ballots.
Government must PROVE that all mail balloting is the MOST secure, accurate, and reliable form of voting. They aren't even close yet.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on June 14, 2005 09:00 AM