The Palm Beach Post covers Clint Curtis in an article yesterday, headlined "Paper-trail advocate to air rigging concerns". The detailed article is occassioned by Curtis' "official audience this week with the committee advising Palm Beach County on voting technology."

Those not familiar with the extraordinary tale which we broke exclusively back in December of 2004, can read a short summary of the remarkable story here. It essentially concerns Curtis' sworn allegations that former Florida House Speaker, now U.S. Congressman Tom Feeney (R-FL), asked him to create vote-rigging software back when Curtis worked as a programmer for the Oveido, FL software firm Yang Enterprises Inc. (YEI). At the time, Feeney, in addition to leading the FL statehouse, was also the general counsel and a registered lobbyist for YEI.

The story also concerns Curtis' long-standing and now-verified claims that YEI was employing a now-convicted Chinese spy and was also engaged in massively overcharging on contracts such as the one it had with the Florida Department of Transporation. As well, there is the startling tale of the untimely, and unexplained demise of the Florida Inspector General, Raymond Lemme, who had been investigating Curtis' charges against YEI and Feeney. Curtis has since passed a polygraph test concerning these charges.

The Post piece covers much of the territory, of course, that BRAD BLOG readers familiar with our year-long plus Clint Curtis coverage will know well by now. Apparently, reporter George Bennett has spent quite a bit of time reading our work here, which we are happy to see.

The downside of the Post article, is the usual misrepresentation of information disquised as "balance" that we see so often these days, not just in coverage of Curtis, but in the MSM in general. Eg., Bennett feels it important, and properly so, to give YEI's attorney's rebuttal to Curtis' charges. But, of course, Bennett then fails to point out that YEI's attorney is also Feeney's old law partner dating back to just prior to his joining the U.S. Congress. Bennett also fails to point out that both YEI and their attorney continue to be large donors to Feeney and that Feeney has continued to lie about his ongoing relationship with the company.

That's just one example of the downsides. The upside, however, is hopefully the additional attention to Curtis' story at a time when a host of new questions are arising concerning Tom Feeney's corruption (he was, you know, on one of those now-infamous trips to St. Andrews to play golf, like Tom DeLay and Bob Ney, for example!)

In addition to this latest article, we have reason to believe there will be still more information and coverage elsewhere of the continuing Clint Curtis saga soon...

UPDATE 1/31/05: We were contacted today by George Bennett, author of the recent Curtis piece in the Palm Beach Post. He had the following reply to this blog item:

The BRAD BLOG appreciates Bennett's clarification, and we're happy to post it here for the record.

Saddam Hussein's intolerable use of weapons of mass destruction against enemies; unprecedented aggression against and occupation of a country which posed no threat to his own; routine kidnapping, torture, murder and secret prison system; wholesale slaughter of citizens from other countries; imprisonment of political rivals held for years without charges; and secret spying on his very own countrymen without court order or legislative approval, demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that this so-called "President" was a dangerous rogue, a tyrant, and a grave threat --- of the highest order --- to worldwide peace, stability and democracy.

His immediate removal from unelected power was...and is...a completely justified imperative.

Guest blogged by David Edwards

A Swiss Senator, Dick Marty, is heading up a European investigation into secret CIA flights that 'rendered' detainees to countries where they could be tortured. An interim report released today found that the allegations of CIA torture flights are true. More than 100 people are suspected to have been abducted by the CIA and flown to countries where torture took place.

Presenting the report to the Council of Europe, Senator Marty said "There is a great deal of coherent, convergent evidence pointing to the existence of a system of relocation or outsourcing of torture."

While no irrefutable evidence of secret CIA prisons was presented in the interim report, Marty said that it is highly likely that the "black prisons" did exist. After the report was released, the EU's top justice official called on authorities in all European countries to cooperate with the investigation.

Video in Streaming Flash format...
Audio in MP3 format...

Guest blogged by David Edwards

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

Computerworld has just today reported on the fact that ES&S has backed out of Leon County, FL. That's ten days after the news was reported by the on-line media. In the mean time the Washington Post has done their second report in two days on voting issues. And the embattled Diebold has put out a press release that misinforms and obfuscates on the accuracy of their DREs....

The BRAD BLOG has obtained the official transcript of last week's congressional hearings on warrantless NSA wiretapping as authorized (on at least thirty occassions) by the Bush Administration. The event was officially titled, "CONSTITUTION IN CRISIS: DOMESTIC SURVEILLANCE AND EXECUTIVE POWER".

The hearing, chaired by ranking House Judiciary Committee minority member, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), was held in the basement of the Rayburn building last Friday after the Republican leadership once again (as they did for hearings on the "Downing Street Documents" last year) refused the Democrats a formal hearing room to conduct the congressional oversight forum. That, despite the House having been in recess on Friday and the official hearing rooms otherwise vacant.

C-SPAN carried the hearings live as seven House members sat on the panel to hear testimony and question the following expert witnesses:

As The BRAD BLOG reported in an exclusive prior to the hearing, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who has defended the Administration's warrantless wiretapping of American citizens on U.S. soil as "legal", despite the prohibition against such activity as outlined by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), was invited to give testimony as well in defense of the Administration's position. He declined to appear, as did any other representative from the Bush Dept. of Justice.

On the day prior to the hearings, however, the DoJ issued a 42-page document declaring the warrantless wiretaps of American citizens on U.S. soil to be "legal". Judiciary Committee member Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) spoke to that document during the hearings, commenting that "making their argument longer did not make it any better." The statement received laughter from the hearing room. Van Hollen followed up by charging:

Some remarkable testimony was given by each of the witnesses at the hearings. It's all now available in full, via the complete 122-page transcript.

-- Complete Transcript of House Democratic Hearings on Warrantless NSA Wiretaps [PDF]

Guest blogged by David Edwards

Several of "The Jersey Girls," who were widowed in the 9/11 attacks, have issued a statement in response to the Bin Laden audiotape released last week which excoriated Bush for his failure and apparent disinterest --- "I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him ... I truly am not that concerned about him." --- in hunting him down "dead or alive", as he once acted like he was promising.

Further, they criticize him for having "sanctioned the torture of individuals, breached constitutional safeguards regarding the privacy rights of U.S. citizens and started an illegal war in Iraq."

Not to mention their enumeration of the various 9/11 Commission recommendations that Bush has all but ignored to this day, some four years and four months since the deaths of their husbands.

This graf however, in particular, caught my eye:

While we agree with the general sentiment, we have just one quibble: Bush should resign now for his unprecedented Constitutional transgressions. There is no reason to wait for the next attack, and indeed it would be insane to do so. Especially as this rubber-stamp Congress will do everything in their power to avoid an impeachment --- as appropriate as would be right now --- in deference to their Political Party's "Commander-in-Chief".

Bush would never have the courage or fortitude or integrity or simple manliness to stand up and face down any impeachment proceeding. He'd go running away with his tail between his legs like the chickenhawk he is, once it became clear that virtually any such impeachment proceedings would have him dead to rights.

So why not show some sense of honor and dignity now, Mr. Bush, by leaving the office which you have tainted and stained beyond even Bill Clinton's wildest wet-dreams?

It's time for Bush, and his criminal co-conspirator Dick Cheney, to resign from office immediately in order to save this country from one more day of inexcusable exposure to attack from terrorists, but even more so, for Bush/Cheney's demonstrated and unmitigated loathing of American Values, their unapologetic failure to uphold their oaths of office to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", and, once and for all, to put an end to the metastized cancer of the unprecedented Executive Shame they have brought to the great United States of America.

VIDEO - Stephanopoulos Interview with John Kerry

Guest blogged by David Edwards

If only words alone could protect our civil liberties and restore democracy for the people.

UPDATE: Pam, from TheDemocraticDaily.com has highlights from, and links to the complete transcript. As well, she's got the RNC's "in a tizzy" response to Kerry's interview. All here...

Guest blogged by David Edwards

This weekend PBS' The McLaughlin Group discussed the growing call for impeachment. There is a lot of talk but as long a Congress continues to defer power to the Executive Branch, public outrage will grow. The majority party in the House of Representative must be changed to realistically pursue impeachment.

Three Questions:

1. Can negative perceptions of the Bush Admin. suppress the "Rove base" while motivating the anti-Bush crowds at the polls?

2. Can this country conduct fair and untainted national elections?
3. If the answer to #2 is "no" then does #1 really matter?

Brad noticed this clip first so he may have some comments to add...

Video in Streaming Flash format...
Video in Windows Media format...

UPDATE: David Swanson of AfterDowningStreet.org/CensureBush.org sends us these thoughts on the above video...

Last month, we reported how the George W. Bush administration has effectively gutted the beloved, 40-year old Voting Rights Act. He has done so by allowing political appointees in the Department of Justice to override the recommendations of career attorneys in the Voting Rights division who had recommended against the Georgia Photo ID Requirement Law and Tom Delay's Texas Congressional Redistricting Scheme.

In both cases, the career attorneys at DoJ had written lengthy memos opposing the new laws --- 4 out of 5 of them in the GA case, 8 out of 8 in the TX case --- only to be overruled by Bush's political cronies. Dan Eggen of The Washington Post broke both of those stories, with some exemplary reporting, after obtaining the leaked memos.

Later, the DoJ mandated that no such written opinions would be allowed in the future.

Eggen, on Page A1 of Monday's WaPo, now has more on the fallout and allegations of politics being played with the VRA within DoJ, as Bush continues to dismantle as many American Values as he can before leaving office...Here's some highlights (or lowlights, as the case may be)...

Guest Blogged by John Gideon, of VotersUnite and VoteTrustUSA

The "DVN Top 5" is a feature in the weekly voting newsletter of VoteTrustUSA. The January 16 edition can be found here. The selection of what will be the "Top 5" for each week and where it goes on the list is all mine. The fact that you may disagree with my choices is great because it shows that you have been reading the DVN articles that I've posted throughout the week here on The BRAD BLOG!...

Compiled and Guest Blogged for The BRAD BLOG by Pokey Anderson, co-host of "The Monitor", a weekly news and analysis show at KPFT Radio in Houston.

EDITOR'S NOTE: Too late to filibuster Alito? Not if what Senator Dick Durbin says is true.

In her first BRAD BLOG Guest Blog, Pokey Anderson lends the Dems a hand, by helping them build their case...

ALITO'S EXTREME VIEWS ARE OUT OF STEP WITH AMERICANS
Samuel Alito, if confirmed, could serve on the US Supreme Court for the rest of your life. At age 55, his life expectancy from now is an additional 28 years or, in other words, the equivalent of 7 presidential terms. Instead of occupying a centrist position, like Sandra Day O'Connor, he would move the court far to the right.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor "provided the swing vote 77 percent of the time. If confirmed, Alito would tip the high court's delicate balance radically to the right. Nearly always favoring the government, corporations and universities, Alito has ruled against individual rights in 84 percent of his dissents."
-- Marjorie Cohn, "Alito Sounds Death Knell for Individual Rights", t r u t h o u t, January 10, 2006

With Judge Samuel Alito, the Senate Judiciary Committee faces its most consequential Supreme Court confirmation hearing in a generation. Not since Robert Bork has the Senate encountered a nominee whose long record and fully articulated views so consistently challenge decades of progress on privacy, civil rights and control of corporations. And never in memory has a single nomination so threatened to redirect the Court as Alito's. [His] fifteen years of rulings ... demonstrates that Alito is at odds with the interests of ordinary Americans.
-- "The Case Against Alito", The Nation, editorial | posted January 5, 2006

Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe, in Senate Judiciary Committee testimony, places Alito to the right of Justice Roberts, and between Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
-- New York Times, January 12, 2006

"After a careful study, University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein described Alito's record of appeals court dissents as 'stunning. Ninety-one percent of Alito's dissents take positions more conservative than his colleagues...including colleagues appointed by Presidents Bush and Reagan.'"
-- "The Case Against Alito" The Nation, editorial | posted January 5, 2006

"The debate over Judge Alito is generally presented as one between Republicans and Democrats. But his testimony should trouble moderate Republicans, especially those who favor abortion rights or are concerned about presidential excesses."
-- "Judge Alito, in His Own Words", NY Times Lead Editorial: January 12, 2006

WHAT IF ALITO IS DEFEATED? WON'T THERE JUST BE A WORSE NOMINEE?
"The White House is banking on fear that if this second nominee goes down, Bush will nominate someone even worse. This argument ignores history: When in 1969-70 President Nixon nominated and lost both Clement Haynsworth and Harrold Carswell, the result was not "someone worse" but the pragmatic, humane Judge Harry Blackmun, who later wrote Roe v. Wade; when Bork was Borked, his replacement was Anthony Kennedy, who in 1992 joined fellow Reagan nominee O'Connor to reaffirm Roe. Alito defeatism also ignores today's political climate: As the midterm elections draw closer, as the Iraq War scandals deepen, Senate Republicans are falling over one another to distance themselves from the Administration and the far right."
-- "The Case Against Alito" The Nation, editorial | posted January 5, 2006

ISN'T THIS NOMINATION A SHOE-IN? A DONE DEAL?
No. It's not. Inside sources are telling me the situation is quite fluid...

We're torn between complaining about Washington Post's delinquency in covering anything to do with our crumbling electoral system and jumping for joy that they've actually filed a credible report on the problems we (and many other "conspiracy theorists", "sore-losers", "tinfoil hat wearers", "anarchists" and "insurgents") have been yelling and screaming about for months --- if not years!

Given our endlessly optimistic nature, however, and the dearth of honest-to-God reporting by the Mainstream Corporate Media on these matters since...well, forever...we'll go ahead, slap a siren on this item, and focus on the "victory" side of things!

In tomorrow's paper, page A6, in a "Special to The Washington Post", Zachary Goldfarb covers the matter of last month's hack of Diebold optical scan machines in Leon County, Florida which completely flipped the results of a mock election test without a trace being left behind.

As well, for the first time, WaPo even discusses some of the findings of the non-partisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) 107-page report on the failures of electronic voting machines which was released last October!

The story cannot be good news to Diebold and the other voting machine vendors, however. They've all had it pretty easy up until now as the Mainstream Corporate Media has played into their "company line" that such concerns were the stuff of "conspiracy theorists" and "sore-losers". Goldfarb even recognizes the fact, even if he doesn't call WaPo on being one of the media outlets who have contributed to Diebold and Friends' appalling ability to marginalize Election Integrity advocates with such insultingly dismissive and democracy-loathing remarks:

Well, there it is. In plain black and white WaPo ink! Go figure!

Goldfarb goes on to make the case quite clearly concerning the Diebold hack as pulled off by Finnish computer security expert Harri Hursti, including Diebold's pathetic response to it:

Well, God Bless America...Perhaps the Mainstream Corporate Media is finally paying attention! Go read the whole thing with your own eyes!

We've heard tell of another major news organization that may soon roll out legitimate coverage of these matters as well.

Can it be that we are finally not alone? Stay tuned...

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

Maybe it's good; maybe it's bad but there is very little voting news today. The article from Yolo County, CA is interesting. The article from VA talks about actions that residents can take to ensure they have verifiable elections in the future. The rest is pretty much business as usual....