Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/7/2004 11:25:30 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Want to hear the 'ugly' scenario? ___________________________________ The U.S. currency's steady decline could be far from over -- and the odds that the global economy will escape unscathed from its correction are getting worse, writes DAVID PARKINSON DAVID PARKINSON The Globe and Mail Saturday, December 4, 2004 So you're starting to feel a bit queasy from the U.S. dollar's tumble? Two syllables of advice: Gravol. The wild ride may be far from over -- and it could be bumpy. That might seem hard to imagine, given that the world's most important currency is already down 29 per cent against seven major world currencies over the past 33 months. In the past three months alone, the greenback has slumped 12 per cent against the euro, 8 per cent against the Japanese yen and 9 per cent against the Canadian dollar. How much worse could it get? Much. Despite the plunge, experts warn, the dollar -- for years, the darling of foreign exchange markets -- is probably still overvalued. More importantly, they say, the U.S. dollar is in the midst of a long-term correction needed to rebalance a global currency and trade picture that is dangerously out of whack. The correction poses sobering risks for global financial markets and probably has a few more years and another 15 to 20 per cent before it's over. No less an authority than former U.S. Federal Reserve Board chairman Paul Volcker warns that there's a 75-per-cent chance of a dollar-fuelled financial crisis within the next five years, unless Washington adjusts its economic policies. The moribund dollar, of course, is only the most visible symptom of a more systemic disease: the dangerously bloated U.S. current account deficit. This deficit -- a broad measure of all U.S. trade in goods and services -- is now running at more than $600-billion (U.S.), over 5 per cent of U.S. gross domestic product and a value equal to the entire GDP of India. These numbers are signs of an unbalanced economy that is consuming far more than it is producing, spending far more than it is saving. Record-low personal savings rates have been exacerbated by the massive U.S. federal budget deficit. To cover the shortfall, the United States must rely on increasing amounts of foreign investment dollars entering the country -- an estimated $2.6-billion each and every business day. As Mr. Volcker said in a television interview last week: "We are increasingly reliant on the goodwill of strangers." Because the exodus of dollars to buy foreign goods and services so far exceeds the influx of dollars from sales of U.S. exports, the currency's decline was inevitable. A cheaper currency would also help cure the current account imbalance. It would discourage U.S. demand for imports, while making U.S. exports cheaper for foreign buyers. That's part of the best-case scenario, in which U.S. and global markets navigate safely through the treacherous waters of a long-term dollar retreat, relying both on remarkably good luck and co-operation from foreign investors willing to keep investing in U.S. assets to finance the deficit. But all sorts of pitfalls might cause these investors to lose faith. The worst-case scenario is much less pretty: Foreign investors, losing confidence in the U.S. dollar's stability and increasingly doubtful that the American economy can absorb the current account imbalance, yank money out of U.S. government bonds, in favour of safer harbours. This exodus sends the dollar off a cliff. Interest rates spike higher, reflecting plunging demand for U.S.-dollar debt and the rising risk perceived by investors. Stock markets tumble, as investors flee U.S. stocks to avoid the currency losses tied to U.S.-dollar-denominated stock prices, as well as the rising interest rates that imply less competitive returns at current stock valuations and the drag on corporate profits from rising credit costs. Corporate and consumer spending slump under the weight of rising interest rates and import prices. The U.S. economy slows to a recession, dragging the rest of the world down with it. Policy makers stand by helplessly; if the Federal Reserve Board were to cut interest rates to stimulate the economy, it would only put more downward pressure on the dollar. Far-fetched? Maybe. Martin Barnes, who described just such a chain of events in his independent research report The Bank Credit Analyst, acknowledges that the scenario -- he called it his "ugly" case -- is "overly gloomy." But it has happened before. In October, 1987, a similar build-up of dollar and deficit worries culminated in the infamous Black Monday crash, the worst one-day percentage loss in U.S. stock market history. Then, as now, the United States was grappling with a deep and growing shortfall in the current account. Then, as now, this deficit was fuelling a downward correction in the U.S. dollar. Then, as now, U.S. government officials signalled a willingness to let the markets take the dollar down further, while squabbling with trading partners over what needed to be done. Although these weren't the only causes of the crash, market historians agree that the slumping dollar and the current account imbalance helped lay the groundwork. Most experts doubt we're headed for a 1987-style meltdown, noting that several of the conditions that snowballed into a market crash 17 years ago aren't in place today. "People tend to forget that there was what some would describe as a bubble in equities in 1987," says Marc Lévesque, chief North American strategist at TD Securities. "The markets had been making huge gains. That's not the case now -- you can't make the case that there's a bubble in equities." Nor is the U.S. economy even close to the inflation and interest rate pressures it faced in 1987 when a dollar selloff helped drive inflation fears and spooked the bond market. The 10-year Treasury bond yield spiked from 7 per cent in early January to more than 10 per cent in October. Inflation jumped from barely 1 per cent to 4.5 per cent. Compare that with the current situation: The 10-year Treasury yield of 4.26 per cent is virtually unchanged from the end of last year, while year-over-year consumer price inflation stood at 3.2 per cent in October, up from 1.9 per cent in December, 2003. "People who bring up 1987 are just trying to make good copy," says Gabriel de Kock, an economist at Smith Barney in New York. The bond market, however, may be a different story. The high prices and resulting low yields bonds have enjoyed this year could leave bonds exposed to a big selloff if foreign holders of U.S. Treasuries dump their holdings and pull their money out of the U.S. If bonds sell off, it would mean higher yields and, therefore, higher interest rates for both corporations and consumers. "If you want to make parallels [to 1987]," Mr. Lévesque says, "it's the bond market that really seems extremely expensive now, based on economic fundamentals. And that's where I think you could see a very serious correction." That correction might have already begun. Bond prices have slumped since late October, sending the yield on two-year Treasury bonds up more than 40 basis points and the 10-year yield almost 30 basis points. (A basis point is 1/100th of a percentage point.) Still, Mr. de Kock dismisses the risk of a mass exodus from the U.S. bond market. "To have this sort of a dramatic selloff, people have to think the Fed's losing control of the situation," he says. "Inflation expectations have to explode. That's when you get the dollar triggering a large bond-market move. That vulnerability in inflation expectations is just not there." Experts also note that the biggest buyers of U.S. government debt have strong incentives to keep buying, in order to temper a bond market decline. About 60 per cent of the foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury securities are held by government treasuries and central banks. The biggest stakeholders, Japan and China, have used U.S.-dollar asset purchases to keep their own currencies low and fuel export growth. National Bank Financial assistant chief economist Stéfane Marion points out that as foreign direct investment and foreign holdings of U.S. equities have fallen over the past year, capital inflows from foreign central banks have made up the slack and increasingly been responsible for financing the current account deficit. While it makes some observers uneasy to see the United States increasingly beholden to these foreign governments, experts say it could be a blessing in disguise. "It is in no country's best interest to dump Treasuries because it would ensure that U.S. [interest] rates would rise sharply, slowing American demand for imported products and likely triggering a worldwide recession," BMO Nesbitt Burns chief economist Sherry Cooper wrote recently. For those reasons, pundits believe, foreign central banks will buy U.S.-dollar assets to moderate the dollar's decline and the interest rate rise. Indeed, Japanese vice finance minister for international affairs Hiroshi Watanabe made it clear this week that Japan -- by far the biggest foreign owner of U.S. government debt, with $720.4-billion worth, more than four times the amount of second-place China -- is poised to intervene in currency markets to slow the U.S. dollar's descent against the yen. But even if international central banks can successfully cushion the dollar's fall, U.S. investments will continue to be exposed to considerable risks. "We've reached an important threshold when the U.S. current account deficit is at 5 per cent of GDP," says National Bank's Mr. Marion. "More and more, the question is how sustainable is this thing. The answer is, nobody really knows." The favoured recipe for correcting the imbalance -- lowering the currency to reverse trade flows, letting interest rates drift higher to force consumers to spend less and save more, and cutting the U.S. budget deficit -- would itself impose strains on the economy and financial markets, no matter how smoothly it can be achieved. The best-case scenario and the view held by most forecasters today: Interest rates still climb, consumer spending still decline, and businesses slow their hiring. Corporate profits would suffer, hurting stock values. And there would be slowdowns in both U.S. and world economic growth. While the depth of such a slowdown is anyone's guess, it's worth remembering that the imbalances of 1987 weren't fully erased until the U.S. slipped into recession in 1991. In a speech last month, Fed chairman Alan Greenspan said the improved flexibility in the U.S. and global economies "suggests that market forces should over time restore, without crisis, a sustainable U.S. balance of payments." In Mr. Greenspan's view, the best way for economies to adjust to shocks and avoid crises is by keeping trade as open as possible. The subtext, however, was clear -- if a dollar-induced shock wave were to cause jittery countries to adopt protectionist policies, the ability to weather the storm could be compromised. Mr. Greenspan also sent a clear signal to U.S. policy makers: Clean up your own house. A reduction in the bloated budget deficit, he said, "appears to be the most effective action that could be taken to augment domestic saving." Experts agree that moves like this could help the United States avoid crisis and come out the other end with healthier markets. In fact, they point to Canada in the 1990s as an example of a government that used a weaker currency and a balanced budget to overcome a large current account deficit without precipitating economic or market collapse. But as Canadians well know, that doesn't mean the process will be painless. "One way or another, you have to have a slowdown in U.S. economic growth," Mr. Lévesque says. "That's the only way the current account deficit can correct. The only issue now is how it happens." -- © The Globe and Mail.

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/11/2004 11:31:24 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Some of our soldiers are going to Canada... Message 20848703

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/11/2004 11:43:48 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Bond King Bill Gross on the fate of the dollar and its consequences... pimco.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/11/2004 11:52:17 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Here are some interesting comments on Inflation and Wal-Mart's impact... Message 20848213

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/11/2004 12:31:27 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA nightweed.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/13/2004 10:15:45 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

The Other Rumsfeld Story..... fpif.org New plans for imperialism in Latin America.

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/13/2004 10:37:34 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Greenspan: Be Careful What You Ask For investorsinsight.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/13/2004 5:03:36 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Fed rate boost won't be to make room for a cut quote.bloomberg.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/14/2004 4:24:20 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Startling New Revelations Highlight Rare Congressional Hearings on Ohio Vote by Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman Published on Monday, December 13, 2004 by The Free Press (Columbus, Ohio) commondreams.org Startling new revelations about Ohio's presidential vote have been uncovered as Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee join Rev. Jesse Jackson in Columbus, the state capital, on Monday, Dec. 13, to hold a rare field hearing into election malfeasance and manipulation in the 2004 vote. The Congressional delegation will include Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones, and others. Taken together, the revelations show Republicans – in state and county government, and in the Ohio Republican Party – were determined to undermine and suppress Democratic turnout by a wide variety of methods. The revelations were included in affidavits gathered for an election challenge lawsuit filed Monday at the Ohio Supreme Court. Ohio's Republican Electoral College representatives are also to meet at noon, Monday, at the State House, even though the presidential recount, requested by the Green and Libertarian Parties, is only beginning the same day. On Sunday, John Kerry spoke with Rev. Jesse Jackson and urged him to take an more active role in investigating the irregularities and ensuring a fair and impartial recount. Kerry said there were three areas of inquiry that should be addressed: 92,000 ballots that recorded no vote for president; qualifying and counting provisional ballots; and supported an independent analysis of the software and set-up of the optical scan voting machines. What follows are excerpts from some of the affidavits for the election challenge. * In Warren County, where election officers declared a homeland security emergency on Election Day, and barred reporters and others from watching the vote count, it now has been revealed that county employees were told the previous Thursday they should prepare for the Election Day lockdown. That disclosure suggests the lockdown was a political decision, not a true security risk. Moreover, statements also describe how ballots were left unguarded and unprotected in a warehouse on Election Day, and they were hastily moved after county officials received complaints. * In Franklin County, where Columbus is located, the election director, Matt Damschroder, misinformed a federal court on Election Day when he testified the county had no additional voting machines – in response to a Voting Rights Act lawsuit brought by the state Democratic Party that minority precincts were intentionally deprived of machines. It now appears as many as 81 voting machines were being held back, out of 2,866 available, according to recent statements by Damschroder and Bill Anthony, the chairman of the Franklin County Board of Elections. The shortage of machines in Democratic-leaning districts lead to long lines and thousands of people leaving in frustration and not voting. Damschroder's contradictory statements raise the possibility of perjury. * Also in Franklin County, a worker at the Holiday Inn observed a team of 25 people who called themselves the "Texas Strike Force" using payphones to make intimidating calls to likely voters, targeting people recently in the prison system. The "Texas Strike Force" members paid their way to Ohio, but their hotel accommodations were paid for by the Ohio Republican Party, whose headquarters is across the street. The hotel worker heard one caller threaten a likely voter with being reported to the FBI and returning to jail if he voted. Another hotel worker called the police, who came but did nothing. * In Knox County, students at Kenyon College, a liberal arts school, stood in line for up to 11 hours, because only one voting machine was in use. However, at nearby Mt. Vernon Nazarene University, there were ample voting machines and no lines. This suggests the GOP shorting of voting machines was a more widespread tactic than just targeting inner-city neighborhoods. * Reports in sworn affadavits affirm numerous instances of direct official interference with the right to vote. In Warren County, Democrats were being targeted and forced to use provisional ballots, even if they had proper identification. These ballots were then subjected to more rigorous standards to be counted than were other ballots. In a half-dozen precincts in Franklin County, people who were not inside polling places by 7:30 PM were told to leave - even if they had waited in line for hours. This is a violation of the Voting Rights Act. Sworn affidavits also confirmed reports of old voter rolls being used, meaning that new voters were not on the list and would be given provisional ballots, if allowed to vote at all. Affidavits were also filed in support of the election challenge suit raising questions about manipulating exit poll results and computer tabulation of county and statewide votes. In one exit poll affidavit, Jonathan David Simon, an expert witness, notes that at 12:53 a.m. the exit polls altered the projected winner – even though the same number of votes had been cast. "Although each update reports the same number of respondents (872), the reported results differ significantly, with the latter (12:53 a.m.) exit poll results apparently having been brought into congruence with the tabulated vote results." In other words, the exit polls were made to conform to a political decision to declare Bush the victor. Another exit poll affidavit, filed by Ron Paul Baiman, an economist and statistician at the University of Illinois and University of Chicago, said the swing in national exit poll results, recorded at 12:33 a.m., when Kerry was winning with 50.8 percent of the vote, to Bush winning with 51.2 percent, was, "in lay terms, impossible." "This is more than a 100 percent swing in the other direction of the exit poll margin, he said. "There is less than a one in 25,000,000 (1/25,507,308) chance of this occurring." Another affidavit by Richard Hayes Phillips, a geomorphology Ph.D. from University of Oregon with a special expertise in spotting anomalous data, found dramatic examples of erroneous voting patterns – with votes taken away from Kerry - that can only be explained by computer manipulation. For instance, in 16 precincts in Cleveland, he found votes that were shifted from Kerry to other candidates. In at least 30 precincts, there was ultra-low voter turnout reported – as low as 7.1 percent or 13.05 percent – and seven entire wards where total turnout was below 50 percent. He writes, "Kerry won Cleveland with 83.27 percent of the vote to 15.88 percent for Bush. If voter turnout were really 60 percent of registered voters, as seems likely based on turnout in other major cities of Ohio, rather than 49.89 percent as reported, Kerry's margin of victory in Cleveland has been wrongly reduced by 22,000 votes." Phillips points to other counties where has says "there is compelling evidence of fraud." In Miami County early on election night, when 31,620 votes had been counted, and later, when 50,235 votes were counted, "Kerry had exactly the same percentage, 33.92 percent, and the percentage for George Bush was almost exactly the same, dropping by 0.03 percent from 65.80 to 65.77 percent. The second set of returns gave Bush a margin of exactly 16,000 votes, giving cause to question the integrity of the central counting device for the optical scan machines. " He cites many other examples, but summarizes his findings: "It is my professional opinion that John Kerry's margins of victory were wrongly reduced by 22,000 votes in Cleveland, by 17,000 votes in Columbus, and by as many as 7,000 votes in Toledo. It is my further professional opinion that John Kerry's margins of defeat in Warren, Butler, and Clermont Counties were inflated by as many as 37,000 votes in the aggregate, and in Miami County by as many as 6,000 votes. There are still 92,672 uncounted regular ballots that, based upon the analysis set forth of the election results from Dayton and Cincinnati, may be expected to break for John Kerry by an overwhelming margin. And there are still 14,441 uncounted provisional ballots." _________________________ Bob Fitrakis, Steve Rosenfeld and Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of OHIO'S STOLEN ELECTION: VOICES OF THE DISENFRANCHISED, 2004, upcoming from www.freepress.org

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/14/2004 5:57:45 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Would Karl Rove & Co. ever consider cheating...? globalresearch.ca ______________ Cobb Testifies Before Congressional Forum in Ohio Reveals Shocking Allegation of New Evidence of Intentional Tampering with Voting Machines votecobb.org ______________ A STOLEN ELECTION: THE VIEW FROM MY BLACK HELICOPTER gregpalast.com Apartheid Ballot Counting in America gregpalast.com 20 Amazing Facts About Voting in the USA nightweed.com Ohio Vote Fraud Battle Heats Up yuricareport.com Witness says voting company tampered with machines after vote and tried to plant false information into Ohio recount bluelemur.com columbus.craigslist.org theatlantic.com <<...Karl Rove is at his most formidable when running close races, and his skills would be notable even if he used no extreme methods. But he does use them. His campaign history shows his willingness, when challenged, to employ savage tactics...>> _________________________________________________________ We may have in our midst, our very own political terrorist, Karl Rove, who works tirelessly to keep his boss in power at any cost -- even the demise of the democratic system...Is anyone concerned...? -s2@StillWaitingForAnotherWoodward&BernsteinToDoSomeSeriousJournalism.com

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/15/2004 8:30:52 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

OHIO: The Verified Petition to Contest the 2004 Presidential Election in Ohio buzzflash.com BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT Below you will find copies of the suit mentioned in this article: "Jackson helps challenge ballot totals in Ohio." As the article states, "If the court hears the challenge, it can declare a new winner or throw out the results." The Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction From the 16-page document (PDF 429 Kb), page 3: (See website for link) In addition to the overwhelming statistical evidence of deliberative outcome determinative nationwide election fraud which extended to Ohio and which is explained in the affidavits supporting this motion, contestants just received this morning prima facie evidence presented by affidavit of a statewide fraud allegedly conducted that the direction of Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell. The effect of Secretary Blackwell's alleged conduct was and is to cover up and obstruct the lawful investigation by Ohio citizens of the fraud which occurred on Election Day 2004. An image of Page 2: (See Website) * * * The Memorandum in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction From the 93-page document (PDF 1.27 Mb), page 30-31: The pre-corrected exit poll data for Ohio predicted that Kerry would win 52.1% of the Ohio Presidential vote. The actual certified result shows Kerry winning 48.7% of the Ohio vote. The difference between the exit poll projection of Kerry's share of the vote and the certified actual Kerry share of the Presidential vote is 3.4%. According to standard statistical analysis, assuming a random exit poll sample and an honest vote count, there is a probability of roughly one in a thousand (0.0012) that this certified election result would occur. This implies that there is a 999/1000 chance that the Ohio exit poll result is either not based on a random sample or that the election itself was not honest. The probability that a pollster with the experience, reputation, and ability of Warren Mitofsky would not be able to draw a random sample is vanishingly small. While there are some convincing red herrings which could be raised (e.g., disproportionate spoilage of ballots, alleged reluctance of Bush supporters to speak with exit pollsters), the inescapable conclusion is that there was election fraud in connection with the vote counting in Ohio. BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (68628)	12/15/2004 3:10:56 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Proof of Ohio Election Fraud Exposed ____________________________ By William Rivers Pitt t r u t h o u t \| Report Wednesday 15 December 2004 Among activists and investigators looking into allegations of vote fraud in the 2004 Presidential election, the company always mentioned was Diebold and its suspicious electronic touch-screen voting machines. It is Diebold that has multiple avowed Republicans on its Board of Directors. It was Diebold that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bush’s election campaign. It was Diebold CEO Walden O’Dell who vowed to deliver Ohio’s electoral votes to Bush. As it turns out, everyone was looking the wrong way. The company that requires immediate and penetrating scrutiny is Triad Systems. Triad is owned by a man named Tod Rapp, who has also donated money to both the Republican Party and the election campaign of George W. Bush. Triad manufactures punch-card voting systems, and also wrote the computer program that tallied the punch-card votes cast in 41 Ohio counties last November. This Triad company graphic displays the counties where their machines are used: Given the ubiquity of the Triad voting systems in Ohio, the allegations that have been leveled against this company strike to the heart of the assumed result of the 2004 election. Earlier this week, the allegations against triad were first raised by Green Party candidate David Cobb, who testified at a hearing held in Columbus, Ohio by Rep. John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee. In his testimony, Cobb stated: Mr. Chairman, though our time is limited, I must bring to the committee's attention the most recent and perhaps most troubling incident that was related to my campaign on Sunday, December 12, about a shocking event that occurred last Friday, December 10. A representative from Triad Systems came into a county board of elections office un-announced. He said he was just stopping by to see if they had any questions about the up-coming recount. He then headed into the back room where the Triad supplied Tabulator (a card reader and older PC with custom software) is kept. He told them there was a problem and the system had a bad battery and had "lost all of its data". He then took the computer apart and started swapping parts in and out of it and another "spare" tower type PC also in the room. He may have had spare parts in his coat as one of the BOE people moved it and remarked as to how very heavy it was. He finally re-assembled everything and said it was working but to not turn it off. He then asked which precinct would be counted for the 3% recount test, and the one which had been selected as it had the right number of votes, was relayed to him. He then went back and did something else to the tabulator computer. The Triad Systems representative suggested that since the hand count had to match the machine count exactly, and since it would be hard to memorize the several numbers which would be needed to get the count to come out exactly right, that they should post this series of numbers on the wall where they would not be noticed by observers. He suggested making them look like employee information or something similar. The people doing the hand count could then just report these numbers no matter what the actual count of the ballots revealed. This would then "match" the tabulator report for this precinct exactly. The numbers were apparently the final certified counts for the selected precinct. Triad is contracted to do much of the elections work in this county and elsewhere in Ohio. This included programming the candidates into the tabulator, and coming up with the rotation of candidates in the various precincts (that is, the order of which candidate is first changes between precincts). They also have a technician in the office on election night to actually run the tabulator itself. Triad also supplies the network computers on which all of the voter registration information and processing is kept for the county. It was unusual for the computers to be taken apart. At least one member of the Board of Elections was told the tabulator was in pieces when he called to check on the office. The source of this report believes that the Triad representative was "making the rounds" of visiting other counties also before the recount. This person also stated they would not pass on the suggestion of the "posted" hidden totals, and would refuse to go along with it if it were suggested by the others in the office at the time. The source of this information believes they could lose their job if they come forward. The source of this information is named Sherole Eaton, Hocking County deputy director of elections. She has since written and signed an affidavit describing her experience with the Triad representative, the text of which is here: Go to Original AFFIDAVIT December 13, 2004 Sherole Eaton Re: General Election 2004 - Hocking County, TriAd Dell Computer about 14 years old - No tower On Friday, December 10 2004, Michael from TriAd called in the AM to inform us that he would be in our office in the PM on the same day. I asked him why he was visiting us. He said, "to check out your tabulator, computer, and that the attorneys will be asking some tricky questions and he wanted to go over some of the questions they maybe ask." He also added that there would be no charge for this service. He arrived at about 12:30PM. I hung his coat up and it was very heavy. I made a comment about it being so heavy. He, Lisa Schwartze and I chatted for a few minutes. He proceeded to go to the room where our computer and tabulation machine is kept. I followed him into the room. I had my back to him when he turned the computer on. He stated that the computer was not coming up. I did see some commands at the lower left hand of the screen but no menu. He said that the battery in the computer was dead and that the stored information was gone. He said that he could put a patch on it and fix it. My main concern was - what if this happened when we were ready to do the recount. He proceeded to take the computer apart and call his offices to get information to input into our computer. Our computer is fourteen years old and as far as I know had always worked in the past. I asked him if the older computer, that is in the same room. could be used for the recount. I don't remember exactly what he said but I did relay to him that the computer was old and a spare. At some point he asked if he could take the spare computer apart and I said "yes". He took both computers apart. I don't remember seeing any tools and he asked Sue Wallace, Clerk, for a screwdriver. She got it for him. At this point I was frustrated about the computer not performing and feared that it wouldn't work for the recount. I called Gerald Robinette, board chairman, to inform him regarding the computer problem and asked him if we could have Tri Ad come to our offices to run the program and tabulator for the recount. Gerald talked on the phone with Michael and Michael assured Gerald that he could fix our computer. He worked on the computer until about 3:00 PM and then asked me which precinct and the number of the precinct we were going to count. I told him, Good Hope 1 # 17. He went back into the tabulation room. Shortly after that he (illegible) stated that the computer was ready for the recount and told us not to turn the computer off so it would charge up. Before Lisa ran the tests, Michael said to turn the computer off. Lisa said, " I thought you said we weren't supposed to turn it off." He said turn it off and right back on and it should come up. It did come up and Lisa ran the tests. Michael gave us instructions on how to explain the rotarien, what the tests mean, etc. No advice on how to handle the attorneys but to have our Prosecuting Attorney at the recount to answer any of their legal questions. He said not to turn the computer off until after the recount. He advised Lisa and I on how to post a "cheat sheet" on the wall so that only the board members and staff would know about it and and what the codes meant so the count would come out perfect and we wouldn't have to do a full hand recount of the county. He left about 5:00 PM. My faith in Tri Ad and the Xenia staff has been nothing but good. The realization that this company and staff would do anything to dishonor or disrupt the voting process is distressing to me and hard to believe. I'm being completely objective about the above statements and the reason I'm bringing this forward is to, hopefully, rule out any wrongdoing. Further buttressing Eaton’s claim is an addendum to a previous affidavit filed by Evelyn Roberson who, you may recall, was involved in the Greene County recount action that was summarily shut down by Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell. Her addendum reads as follows: Addendum to Declaration of Evelyn Roberson dated December 12, 2004 Re: Incidents of December 10, 2004 This is to add to the approximately 1 :15 p.m. portion of the visit with the Deputy Director of Elections Lyn McCoy with respect to the following comment: "She said they would have their computer technician check over their computers on Monday in case they has been tampered with." the addition is that Lyn McCoy also mentioned to me at the same time that her computer technician was with Triad. I declare under penalty of perjury the forgoing is true and correct. Dated: December 14, 2004 Evelyn Roberson Original versions of these documents should be available later on Wednesday on the website of Rep. Conyers. Conyers, upon hearing these allegations, sent a letter to both the FBI Special Agent in Charge in Ohio and the Hocking County Prosecutor. The text of that letter is as follows: December 15, 2004 As part of the Democratic staff's investigation into irregularities in the 2004 election and following up on a lead provided to me by Green Party Presidential Candidate, David Cobb, I have learned that Sherole Eaton, a Deputy Director of Board of Elections in Hocking County, Ohio, has first hand knowledge of inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering in the Ohio presidential election in violation of federal and state law. I have information that similar actions of this nature may be occurring in other counties in Ohio. I am therefore asking that you immediately investigate this alleged misconduct and that, among other things, you consider the immediate impoundment of election machinery to prevent any further tampering. On December 13, my staff met with Ms. Eaton who explained to them that last Friday, December 10, Michael Barbian, Jr., a representative of Triad GSI unilaterally sought and obtained access to the voting machinery and records in Hocking County, Ohio, modified the computer tabulator, learned which precinct was planned to be the subject of the initial test recount and made further alterations based on that information, and advised the election officials how to manipulate the machinery so that the preliminary hand recount matched the machine count. Ms. Eaton first relayed this information to Green Party representatives, and then completed, signed and notarized an affidavit describing this course of events, a copy of which is attached. The Triad official sought access to the voting machinery based on the apparent pretext that he wanted to review some "legal questions" the officials might receive as part of the recount process. At several times during this visit, Mr. Barbian telephoned into Triad's offices to obtain programming information relating to the machinery and the precinct in question. I have subsequently learned that Triad officials have been, or are in the process of intervening in several other counties in Ohio - Greene and Monroe, and perhaps others (see attached). There are several important considerations you should be aware of with respect to this matter. First, this course of conduct would appear to violate several provisions of federal law, in addition to the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. 42 U.S.C. §1973 provides for criminal penalties against any person who, in any election for federal office, "knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by . . . the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held." 42 U.S.C. § 1974 also requires the retention and preservation, for a period of twenty-two months from the date of a federal election, of all voting records and papers and makes it a felony for any person to "willfully steal, destroy, conceal, mutilate, or alter" any such record. Further, any tampering with ballots and/or election machinery would violate the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote and have their votes properly counted, as guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Second, the course of conduct would also appear to violate several provisions of Ohio law. No less than 4 provisions of the Ohio Revised Code make it a felony to tamper with or destroy election records or machines.1 Clearly, modifying election equipment in order to make sure that the hand count matches the machine count would appear to fall within these proscriptions. Moreover, bringing in Triad officials into other Ohio Counties would also appear to violate Ohio Revised Code § 3505.32 which provides that during a period of official canvassing, all interaction with ballots must be "in the presence of all of the members of the board and any other persons who are entitled to witness the official canvass," given that last Friday, the Ohio Secretary of State has issued orders to the effect that election officials are to treat all election materials as if they were in a period of canvassing,2 and that "Teams of one Democrat and one Republican must be present with ballots at all times of processing." Third, it is important to recognize that the companies implicated in the wrongdoing, Triad and its affiliates, are the leading suppliers of voting machines involving the counting of paper ballots and punch cards in the critical states of Ohio and Florida. Triad is controlled by the Rapp family, and its founder Tod A. Rapp has been a consistent contributor to Republican causes.4 A Triad affiliate, Psephos corporation, supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the 2000 presidential election. Sincerely, John Conyers, Jr. Enclosures cc: The Honorable F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. The New York Times published a report on the matter late Tuesday night: Go to Original Lawmaker Seeks Inquiry Into Ohio Vote By Tom Zeller Jr. The New York Times Wednesday 15 December 2004 The ranking Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, plans to ask the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a county prosecutor in Ohio today to explore "inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering" in at least one and perhaps several Ohio counties. The request for an investigation, made in a letter that was also provided to The New York Times, includes accounts from at least two county employees, but is based largely on a sworn affidavit provided by the Hocking County deputy director of elections, Sherole Eaton. Among other things, Ms. Eaton says in her affidavit that a representative of Triad Governmental Systems, the Ohio firm that created and maintains the vote-counting software in dozens of Ohio counties, made several adjustments to the Hocking County tabulator last Friday, in advance of the state's recount, which is taking place this week. Ohio recount rules require that only 3 percent of a county's votes be tallied by hand, and typically one or more whole precincts are selected and combined to get the 3 percent sample. After the hand count, the sample is fed into the tabulator. If there is no discrepancy, the remaining ballots can be counted by the machine. Otherwise, a hand recount must be done for the whole county. Ms. Eaton contends that the Triad employee asked which precinct Hocking County planned to count as its representative 3 percent, and, upon being told, made further adjustments to the machine. County officials decided to use a different precinct when the recount was done yesterday. No discrepancies were found. "This is pretty outrageous," Mr. Conyers said. "We want to pursue it as vigorously as we can." But Brett Rapp, the president of Triad, said that although it would be unusual for an employee to ask about a specific precinct, preparing the machines for a recount was standard procedure and was done in all 41 counties where Triad handles vote counts. He added that he welcomed any investigation. "I've been doing this since 1985, and in all my experience this is the first time that we have had any complaints whatsoever," Mr. Rapp said. _____________________ William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and international bestseller of two books - 'War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You To Know' and 'The Greatest Sedition is Silence.' truthout.org