(More details on the above here if you missed it.)

Guest blogged by David Edwards

This morning on ABC's This Week, Congressman John Murtha told George Stephanopoulos that he believes the Bush Administration will pull out of Iraq in 2006.

Video in Windows Media format...
Video in QuickTime format...
Audio in MP3 format...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

Today we have a hodge-podge of news items. It seems that most of the news makers of the last few days are having a snooze and getting ready for the next flurry of excitement. Today we have a report from Texas were there is concern about a contract they have with Accenture (you may remember them as Arthur Anderson Consulting and their work with Enron) now that Colorado has just canceled a voter data base contract with them. In Ohio a judge has denied a request by attorneys for Gov. Taft and SoS Blackwell to dismiss a lawsuit against them by the state LWV....

Guest blogged by David Edwards

Video in Windows Media format...
Video in QuickTime format...

On Wednesday, President Bush gave a speech at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis to unveil an unclassified version of something called the "National Strategy for Victory in Iraq".

As Maureen Dowd notes in today's NY Times, the Bush Administration's recently released plan is not a plan for victory as much as badly crafted political talking points. We wonder if the victory that Mr. Bush is planning for has more to do with the 2006 elections than achieving stability in Iraq.

Mr. Bush asserts that progress is being made in Iraq but his facts don't stand up to the truth on the ground. One of the most glaring discrepancies is Bush's claim that Iraqi troops lead the recent assault on Tal Afar. The Time Magazine reporter, Michael Ware, who was embedded with Iraqi troops in the Tal Afar battle has a different story:

It's no surprise that a majority of Americans don't believe that the Bush Administration has a plan for victory in Iraq.

While the Bush team is flailing to find decent talking points, the Democrats can't seem to agree on any plan for resolution of the Iraq war crisis. By the end of this week the Democrats were holding at least three different positions:

• Lieberman - Let 'em die. Whatever Bush says is OK with me.

• Hillary - Let 'em die for another year or so. Maybe I'll change my mind after a few more polls.
• Murtha - Bring 'em home as soon as practicable (6 months or less).

We've complied some video clips highlighting this week's developments in the politics of Iraq. From Bush's misleading speech to the Democrats fractured positions, it seems that most politicians are more concerned with their political futures than the futures of 150,000 men and women who have become living targets in an un-justified and un-winnable war.

Video in Windows Media format...
Video in QuickTime format...

Debra Bowen, author of the "Bowen Amendment" (SB 370) which mandated "paper trails" for all votes in California, is now running for Secretary of State out here. She blogs about the now-nearly-infamous "Hack Test" that may soon occur on Diebold machines here in California.

She also asks that you sign her email petition demanding current Sec. of State Bruce McPherson thoroughly test such machines before they are certified by the state. I ask you to do so as well!

You don't need to be in California to sign the petition, as far as I know. And since what happens here will soon happen there, I strongly recommend you sign it.

(I recommend this because it's important, not just because she called me her "hero" during a joint appearance earlier today on KRXA 540am. Though that didn't hurt!

UPDATE 12/5/05: Bowen's office sends this information to clarify one of my statements above:

It does indeed, and my thanks to Bowen's office for sending over the clarification!

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In a stunning reversal the North Carolina State Board of Elections decided to ignore state law and certify three voting systems for use in the state. Keith Long, an advisor to the Board of Elections who was formerly employed by both Diebold and Sequoia, has said that "none of them" could meet the statutory requirement to place their system code in escrow. Instead of rejecting all applications and issuing a new call for bids as required by law, the Board chose to approve all of the applicants. Long also said that it was not necessary to review the source code, even though state law requires it, because the ITA has already done that before federal qualification....

Washington Post, in a stunning front page splash today, is reporting that political appointees in George W. Bush's Dept. of Justice overruled their own attorneys in the Voting Rights Act unit who had recommended against Texas' state redistricting plan for Congressional districts. That new redistricting plan was key to former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's (R-TX) controversial strategy in the state which eventually resulted in 7 additional Republicans being elected to the U.S. House in 2004.

Eight staffers at the DoJ, including the heads of the Voting Rights Division, advocated against the redistricting in a 73-page memo, but Bush political appointees agreed to allow the changes to go through anyway! The Voting Rights Act requires DoJ pre-approval of changes to electoral law in several states where minority voting rights have historically been an issue.

According to WaPo, "The Justice Department memo recommending rejection of the Texas plan was written by two analysts and five lawyers. In addition, the head of the voting section at the time, Joseph Rich, wrote a concurring opinion."

The disturbing revelation is similar to one reported two weeks ago, based on another yet leaked memo reported by WaPo's Dan Eggen, in which the Bush Attorney General is shown to have overruled 4 of 5 staffers who had recommended against pre-approval of Georgia's new Photo ID requirement at the polls. That law has since been struck down by Federal Courts which described it as a "Jim Crow-era Poll Tax."

The Bush administration has made a mockery of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 which celebrated its 40th anniversary over the summer. Several key clauses of the Voting Rights Act will be coming up for renewal authorization by Congress in 2007. It was reported some time ago that George W. Bush was "not familiar" with the VRA when asked about his support for its renewal during a meeting with several minority legislators in the summer prior to the 2004 election.

In 2003, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), the ranking member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, had requested review of the documents now revealed by WaPo. He was met with "a cold response" at the time from the DoJ according to a just-issued press release (posted in full below). He is now calling for a full investigation by the Judiciary Committee into both the Texas and Georgia matters.

The following is from an AP summary of the WaPo's report [emphasis added]:

The WaPo report adds:

The full memo is available on the WaPo site here [PDF].

UPDATE: MSNBC Video of WaPo's Dan Eggen discussing story...

Conyers' just-released call for an investigation into the matter follows in full...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

In an almost expected turn of events Diebold was certified to be used in North Carolina today. This happened without meeting state code that requires inspection, for security purposes, of their source code. Essentially they lost in court because they were told they could not get a waiver from state law so the state gave them the waiver anyway and they are attempting to get away with this by making the same offer to other vendors....

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org and VoteTrustUSA.org

Surprise! Diebold got certified in North Carolina today. In what the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is calling the "Immaculate Certification" the North Carolina State Board of Elections has decided to certify Diebold. This is the same Diebold that three days ago said that they would have to pull out of consideration in the state because they were not willing to put their buggy software source code from their flawed Voting Machines into escrow claiming they had third-party software that could not be submitted to the state. This is the same Diebold that, as BRAD BLOG correctly surmised, were apparently making faux claims about their need to pull out of NC due to a court's refusal to allow them exemption from that state law. But what else is new for a company like Diebold?

In a blog item just posted by Matt Zimmerman of EFF, says,

One computer savvy voting activist with North Carolina Verifiable Voting has pointed out correctly that the Board of Elections now has another rather obvious problem. The statute requires the Board of Elections to review all of the code used in vendors' proposed system before certification. Either they ignored this part of the code or they have some super code and security experts in hiding somewhere.

At the superior court hearing on Monday, the state Attorney General said that she couldn't imagine that the Board of Elections would certify a system that didn't meet all of the requirements of the statute. Well, they did and now she must defend them.

And who made the decision to go ahead and ignore the code and certify Diebold? A gentleman by the name of Keith Long was hired to be in charge of the process for the state. And what are Mr. Long's credentials to handle this job? Mr. Long was one of the Diebold representatives responsible for previously selling the Diebold voting system to the state of Georgia.

RAW STORY's Miriam Raftery opens up on the scam apparently being perpetuated by California Sec. of State Bruce McPherson in what appears to be a last-minute effort to quickly re-certify Diebold's TSx touch-screen voting machines in California as the Jan 1, 2006 deadline for the Help America Vote Act looms.

A recent "Voting Systems Testing Summit" convened last week by McPherson in Sacramento appears to have been purposely rigged by the SoS's office to tilt strongly towards the presentation of information that supports the return of Diebold's buggy and unsecured voting machines to the state.

As reported by Raftery...

A massive public test of the machines held over the summer by Republican McPherson revealed that 20% of the Diebold machines had failed to perform properly (RAW STORY lists the number as 30%). But a subsequent test held privately, using machines specially prepared by Diebold gave only a reported 3% error rate.

Amonst the nuggets uncovered in Raftery's report is this information from Diebold spokesperson, David Bear:

Bear had recently lied in an interview with The BRAD BLOG when he at first claimed that Diebold's Central Vote Tabulator "isn't accessable via modem." When pressed further, he was later forced to admit that it was. He also claimed to be unaware of a "Cyber Security Alert" issued by a branch of the US Dept. of Homeland Security prior to last year's Presidential Election warning about the security vulnerability in Diebold's tabulation software.

Raftery outlines the overwhelming imbalance of the assembled panelist for the event last week where Voting Rights and Election Reform activists were largely shut out. That, despite a conversation The BRAD BLOG had just last Monday live on air with a spokesperson from the SoS office who had denied the allegation. The full audio and text transcript of that live on-air interview on KRXA 540am in Montery, CA is posted here.

Raftery found much evidence suggesting the heavily weighted pro-Electronic Voting factions and the apparent lock-out of Election Reform and Voting Rights advocates at the summit. For example, Raftery reports on several of the panelists who were allowed to attend and speak on the matter:

And more like the above:

Meanwhile, reformers and activists from California Elections Protection Network (CEPN), for example, were entirely shut out from even attending --- much less presenting! --- at the summit:

The letter referred to above, from the SoS's office, as posted on the CEPN website says:

States and counties around the country are keeping a close eye on the decision soon to be made by California which is, as Diebold regards it, the country's largest "voting market." What happens in this state, may well effect the decisions made by countless Boards of Elections around the country as they all face the impending deadline to receive federal funding for upgrades to their election systems.

Be sure to read RAW's full story for much more!

To submit your own comment to the CA Sec. of State, visit http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections_vs.htm, call (916) 653-6814 or email votingsystemcomment@ss.ca.gov.

Good lord is this woman a whack-job or what? From the BBC coverage of an upcoming interview with Judith Miller. Her "apologies" for helping lead the drumbeat that resulted in an endless war and thousands dead and wounded for life:

I'm deeply sorry the NY Times decided to destroy their own once-great reputation by giving this loon a paycheck. Ever.

And if the above is not pitiable enough, she reportedly admits that Scooter Libby was one of her sources for the Plame leak (didn't she tell us previously she couldn't remember who told her?) but when asked if Karl Rove was also a source, she tells BBC:

Huh? I'm no legal eagle, but is there some kind of law that prevents a witness to a crime from telling the press what they know about the crime?

Does this woman think that an interview she gives to the BBC won't make it aaaall the way back here across the pond?

She lost her job, and now --- it seems --- she's lost her mind. Or did that happen in the reverse order? Good lord...

{Update from David Edwards: Here's the video and audio of BBC's exclusive interview with Judy Miller.}

Video in Windows Media format...
Video in QuickTime format...
Audio in MP3 format...

Update #2: A transcript of the Miller interview is available at Why Are We Back in Iraq?

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

The depth and pressure of all of the news reports about electronic voting issues must have finally built up so much that the Associated Press 'dam' finally burst and they had to respond! Today they even mentioned the GAO report, well over a month after it was issued with much bipartisan fanfare from members of Congress.

"E-voting under scrutiny as federal compliance deadline looms", by AP Technology Writer Brian Bergstein, correctly says that some states are in trouble and will not be able to meet some mandates of the Help America Vote Act of 2002.

Bergstein runs through the gamut of problems that have been reported in the past few days and some that happened in past elections. With regards to the GAO report he says:

Bergstein also discusses yesterday's report from North Carolina where Diebold was told to 'put up or shut up': either meet the state law that requires them to put all their source code into escrow, or forget about doing business in North Carolina.

It's almost as if Bergstein had been reading The BRAD BLOG because he also picked up on the California hack story and got an update on that from the SoS spokeswoman, Nghia Nguyen Demovic.

Unfortunately Bergstein didn't report on the "Deadline" and what that means to many states. California is one of many states that will not meet the January 1, 2006 deadline for having accessible voting systems. This is going to be a nationwide problem. Yesterday, the Sacramento Bee had this to say:

We are happy to see the Associated Press finally coming out of their shell with regard to voting technology. Is this something that will last or is it just a passing phase?

Guest blogged by Winter Patriot

As usual, there's a great deal of important new material on the blog at the moment and I wouldn't want to distract you from it. But on the other hand I thought you might like to know [even a bit belatedly] that Buzzflash has published the second installment of Maureen Farrell's three-part essay about the history of modern America.

As loyal BRAD BLOG reader and frequent commenter Robert Lockwood Mills pointed out last week, when the first part was published, it's "anecdotal history, not a narrative. But if even half of the dots connect it's very, very scary."

In my opinion, the number of dots that connect is way more than half.

If you've already read the first part, you'll have some idea of what to expect. If you haven't, please consider this a friendly reminder.

Below, a few short excerpts from part two:

Guest Blogged by John Gideon of VotersUnite.org

A typical Wed. newsday today. Lot's of news. In Venezuela three political parties dropped out of the legislative elections because they do not think the elections are being fairly administered. There is a lot more from California regarding the now infamous 'hack' but you really need to go to BlackBoxVoting.Org to get the whole story. There are recounts planned in a few states but most of them will be done on DREs so they are really a waste of time. And, there is a comprehensive article from the AP about the HAVA deadline. This article actually mentions the GAO report which is pretty much a first for the AP...

I'm addressing folks on Election Reform issues tonight at an event organized by Global Exchange/Ventura County. It's a FREE event, so come on by if you're in the 'hood and say hello! It's at 7pm PT with a Q&A after. Here's more info, and there are specific location details as well at the top of the BRAD BLOG Front Page right now.

If I'm available on time, I may be on Trevor Carey's show on KFKA News Radio (1310am in Greeley/Fort Collins, CO) along with Lydia Cornell at 9:30p PT as well. I believe she'll be there either with or without me if you listen online or call in to say hey.

Otherwise, in the meantime, consider this an Open Thread to your heart's desire...