Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://snipurl.com/qay7

CRANKS AND KOOKS: KERRY WON IN '04
by Greg Palast
Wednesday, May 10, 2006

THE CON

Kerry Won. Now Get Over It . . .

...because they're putting '08 in their pocket. Republicans just seem to
have that winning spirit. They also have caging lists, felons of the future,
rotting ballots, snuffed canaries, and a lock on the votes of Kissinger-
Americans and the undead.

WARNING! There are cranks and kooks and crazies out there on the Internet
who say that George Bush lost the 2004 election, like one titled, "Kerry
Won" published on the TomPaine.com web site two days after the election. I
wrote it.

On November 11, a week after TomPaine.com published it, I received an
e-mail from The New York Times Washington Bureau. Hot on the investigation
of the veracity of the vote, The Times reporter asked me pointed
questions:

Question #1: Are you a "sore loser"?

Question #2: Are you a "conspiracy nut"?

There was no third question. Investigation of the vote was, for The Times
at any rate, complete. The next day, the paper's thorough analysis of the
evidence yielded this front-page story, "VOTE FRAUD THEORIES, SPREAD BY
BLOGS, ARE QUICKLY BURIED."

As America's self-proclaimed Paper of Record had no space for the facts, I
thought I'd share some with you here.

"Kerry Won" was not a two-day inquiry à la Times. It was the latest in a
series of investigative reports coming out of a four-year team
examination, begun for BBC Television's Newsnight, Britain's Guardian
papers and Harper's Magazine, dissecting that greasy sausage called
American electoral democracy.

And, by the way, the answer to Question #1: I didn't lose, so I'm not
sore. This investigation isn't about John Kerry. As a journalist, I don't
give a toss which rich white kid won the game. But I'm not so blasé that I
don't care about the disappearance of American democracy. And I really
wanted to know how the Bushes swallowed the sausage.

How'd they do it? Again. And how will they do it in '08? The answer
arrived just after midnight on October 8, 2004, three weeks before the
official voting, in a series of extraordinary e-mails. The e-mails were
intended for the chieftains of the President's re-election campaign in
Washington. Strangely enough, they were misaddressed and ended up in my
mailbox. Such things happen.


Night of the Uncounted: How to Disappear Three Million Votes

But the e-mails and their technical attachments won't mean a thing unless
you understand some arcane facts about elections American-style.

First, consider CNN's Ohio exit polls broadcast just after midnight after
the voting ended on Election Day. They show John Kerry defeated George
Bush among women voters by 53% to 47%. And among men voters, Kerry
defeated Bush 51% to 49%.

So here's your question, class: What third sex put George Bush over the
top in Ohio and gave him the White House?

Answer: The Uncounted.

In Ohio, there were 153,237 ballots simply thrown away, more than the Bush
"victory" margin. In New Mexico the uncounted vote was fives times the
Bush alleged victory margin of 5,988. In Iowa, Bush's triumph of 13,498
was overwhelmed by 36,811 votes rejected. In all, over three million votes
were cast but never counted in the 2004 presidential election. The
official number is bad enough-1,855,827 ballots cast not counted, reported
to the federal government's Election's Assistance Commission. But the feds
are missing data from several cities and entire states too embarrassed to
report the votes they failed to count. Correcting for the under-reporting
of the undercount, the number of ballots cast but never counted goes to
3,600,380. And there are certainly more we couldn't locate to tote up.

Why doesn't your government tell you this? Hey, they do. It's right there
in black-and-white on a U.S. Census Bureau announcement released seven
months after the election-in a footnote to the report on voter turn-out.
The Census tabulation of voters voting "differs," from ballots tallied by
the Clerk of the House of Representatives for the 2004 presidential race
by 3.4 million votes.

This is the hidden presidential count which, excepting the Census'
whispered footnote, has not been reported.

Unfortunately, that's not all. In addition to the 3 million ballots
uncounted due to technical "glitches," millions more were lost because the
voters were prevented from casting their ballots in the first place. This
group of un-votes includes voters illegally denied registration or wrongly
purged from the registries.

In the voting biz, most of these lost votes are called "spoilage."
Spoilage, not the voters, picked our president for us.

Joe Stalin, the story goes, said, "It's not the people who vote that
count; it's the people who count the votes." That may have been true in
the old Soviet Union, but in the U.S.A, the game is much, much subtler: He
who makes sure votes don't get counted decides our winners.

In the lead-up to the 2004 race, millions of Americans were, not
unreasonably, panicked about computer voting machines, "black boxes," that
could flip your vote from John Kerry to George Bush. Images abounded of an
evil hacker-genius in Dick Cheney's bunker rewriting code and zapping the
totals. But that's not how it went down. The computer scare was the
McGuffin, the fake detail used by magicians to keep your eye off their
hands. The new black boxes played their role, albeit minor, but the
principal means of the election heist-voiding ballots, overwhelmingly of
the poor and Black-went unexposed, unreported and most importantly,
uncorrected and ready to roll out on a grander scale in 2008.


I went to sleep election night with the exit polls showing Kerry ahead in
swing states. But between 1:05 am and 6:41 am the next morning, goblins
went to work. By dawn, the network's exit poll for Ohio showed Kerry dead
even with Bush among women, and down by five percentage points among men.

What happened? Were thousands of Bush voters locked in the voting booths,
released at 2am, then queried about their choices? Not quite. The
network's polling company applied a fancy "algorithm," a mathematical
magic wand, to slowly transform the exit polls to match the official
count.

And that's bad. By deliberately contaminating the exit polls, the networks
snuffed the canary that would signal that something was deeply wrong about
the vote count.

Hunting for a Democrat to defend the Twilight Zone between the exit polls
and the "official" polls, media grabbed on Dick Morris, Bill Clinton's old
advisor. An expert at walking that fine line between minor criminality and
psychopathic ambition, Morris knows which way his next client's wind
blows.

Morris said:

"Exit polls are almost never wrong. So reliable are the surveys that
actually tap voters as they leave the polling places that they're used as
guides to the relative honesty of elections in Third World Countries. To
screw up one exit poll is unheard of. To miss six of them is incredible."

His opening was promising, but then he switches into full Morris:
"It boggles the imagination how pollsters could be that incompetent and
invites speculation that more than honest error was at play here."

So, Dick, you're telling us there was an evil cabal among six pollsters,
competitors who don't even like each other, conspiring one dark night to
make George Bush look like a vote thief.

There's another explanation: Kerry won.

We've got the body (the wounded elections), we've got the bullet holes
(the missing votes), now where are the smoking guns? How does the GOP
disappear the vote? And why do Democratic ballots spoil so much more
readily than Republican ballots? How's it done?

But that little Bill O'Reilly in your head is screaming, Get over it;
let's move on already. That's the point of investigation. What they tested
in 2000 and practiced in 2004, they are preparing to roll out in 2008 big
time.

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or you 
can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will become disabled or deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to