It took FDOT over three years to reach that conclusion? Sounds like things are getting a bit too warm down in Florida, and an investigation that got buried had to be resurrected. But overbilling is just the tip of the iceberg. The Republicans have been quite literally selling our national defense to the Chinese--likely for BILLIONS. I won't be satisfied til I see the Yangs and their treasonous American friends hanged.

Wouldn't it be nice if The Oviedo Voice newspaper that has been criticising Curtis all along would publish what it claims to have published (a fair story giving Curtis the benefit of the doubt)?

So far as we know, it has been siding strongly with the Yang side of the story when the only one to be proven valid on all points so far is Curtis, and when Yang has been the one caught on the wrong side of veracity?

Yet more proof that Curtis is telling the truth. He has not been caught in one untruth, not one.And we have all seen the lies from Feeney/Yang's side over , and over again. Sounds simple to me, does 2+2 still = 4 ? Mabe I'm getting senile.

Nice work, Brad!

Can you imagine uproar that would erupt from Feeney/YEI and their lawyers if there were but *one* of Curtis' points that they could prove was a lie?

Meanwhile, Feeney/YEI get caught in lie, after lie, after lie, after lie.

Enough already.

Feeney/YEI really have absolutely no sense of shame.

For somebody to continue naysaying despite this kind of overwhelming evidence speaks to the magnitude of illicit activities they must be involved in.

They *must* realize by now they are caught. They must think that they are in so deep, they have nothing more to lose by continuing their denials.

***Keep digging everyone!!***

The article says, "But he subsequently learned from his boss that it was to be used in the 2004 presidential election 'to control the vote in South Florida.'"

Is that correct? If so, it's the first time I've heard that specific claim about the 2004 presidential election.

Brad, can you verify?

I second American Woman's query, Brad. As far as I can recollect, the 2004 election was never mentioned in connection with the software request. Curtis stated in his signed affidavit that Feeney asked him to create a prototype vote-rigging program. Where did Tailpipe get this other stuff, or did they just project? If so, that's not reporting and could be damaging to Curtis and, by extension to BradBlog.

Sshhhhh. Be baywe, baywe, qwiet. I'm hunting fo' wabbits. It's wabbit season...

Dem cwazy wabbits...

Dredd said on 3/2/2005 @ 2:54pm PT...
"Wouldn't it be nice if The Oviedo Voice newspaper that has been criticising Curtis all along would publish what it claims to have published (a fair story giving Curtis the benefit of the doubt)?"

They're not going to do anything to cross Tom Feeney. They've already made that clear.

...And, this so-called threat of Tom Feeney to sue anyone who pursues this is a lot of hot air. The last place Feeney wants this is in open court, in an open forum.

If Clint Curtis was swearing depositions like this about me, and they were actually lies, I'd sue him so fast it would make your head swim! I'd submit myself to a lie detector test and make sure the results were published....that's IF they were lies.

Remember the great Ghandi quote? "(1)First they ignore you, (2)then they laugh at you, (3)then they fight you, (4)then you win."

I'd say Brad, and Clint Curtis, are on the second phase. Not so much ignoring going on, as in the past (Noles certainly isn't ignoring). Most of what is happening now is diversive in nature, trying to belittle the cause, calling names, and trying to make you out as liar (and failing to produce any facts, by the way).

The third phase, "then they fight you", could be coming soon, and it could be VERY ugly, because they really can't afford to fight fair (r.i.p., Ray Lemme).

I'd like to see lie detectors strapped onto the whole bunch of these people: Clint Curtis, Tom Feeney, The Yangs, Henry Nee, Mike Cohen... any guesses as to who would be the only "volunteer" out of that list?

Any long-shot possibility of getting a class-action suit going on this issue? There are enough disenfranchised voters, and others (such as people involved in Bev Harris' attempt to expose the illegal blockage of her efforts to get to the bottom of the voting irregularities), that I wolud think it should be considered.

This whole thing needs a stronger, and more visible, public forum.

Bob B -

Yes. And we need some honest public prosecutors, if they exist any more. Has anyone heard of a D.A. without political creditors these days?

Or, I should have said, creditees?

Bob Bilse #9 "Any long-shot possibility of getting a class-action suit going on this issue? There are enough disenfranchised voters, and others (such as people involved in Bev Harris' attempt to expose the illegal blockage of her efforts to get to the bottom of the voting irregularities), that I wolud think it should be considered."

The appropriate vehicle may be "private attorney general" statutes. I will look into Florida's structure, but it is said to be a corrupt state ... on par with Texas. Will look anyway.

Bev Harris has had some recent success with a suit against the vote machine company Diebold. California's AG jumped in the first phase.

The spy thing in the Florida Feeney/Yang issue is political and the criminal phase has passed, but there may be some civil action that could be brought, and as you say as a class action.

One would have to show damage to the public sector and some enabling statute that allows citizens to do something whether the AG of Florida does or not.

There is a basis for public damage now since the FDOT has been bilked by Yang. There is testimony that Feeney enabled it. But no docs yet ...

It would be a useful vehicle but the end result would not be jail or anything, just damages and perhaps injunctive relief.

Probably the most valuable thing would be publicity.

I believe "2004" was a misprint, referring to when the software prototype was to be used to control the vote in South Florida. Curtis has always said it was 2000, and that Mrs. Yang insisted it be devised in time for the election.

If Florida is seeking a refund of almost $250 grand from Yang, that's an issue reaching to the highest echelons of state government. Seems little brother Jeb should have something to say on the matter, given that the (then) highest ranking Republican in the state legislature was advising a company since proven to have engaged in treasonous activities against the United States on how to bill Florida for services provided.

That isn't a conspiracy theory, folks, it's a scandal.

"Tailpipe" has a nice cut through the crap kind of style. Hope he/she's for real.

re: comments #9 and #12

might this be applicable?

http://yuricareport.com/...gal/RICO_Prosecution.htm

Off topic, but I wanted you to see this Peg C. Auntie Pinko's got it right. Wasn't that long ago at all.

Curtis' affidavit, and what he's told me, is that Mrs. Yang said to him "You don't understand...this is to flip the vote in South Florida".

I don't believe a date was given for any particular election year. At least not as I was told by Curtis. Could have been 2000, 2002, 2004, etc. I don't know. Though New Times might have gotten more specifics on that point from Curtis than I did.

...Dredd said on 3/2/2005 @ 11:42pm PT...
"Probably the most valuable thing would be publicity."

That was what I had in mind. Publicity. I wouldn't expect jail, and fines mean nothing, but bringing this to wider public attention. Maybe a suit would keep everyone from sweeping this under the rug like it wasn't there.

Bob Bilse #18 Understood.

George #15 Interesting link you posted. For those who do not know how to use it in that format, I have converted it into another format (link here).

I am also adding an article that explains a little bit about "private attorney general" statutes, like RICO (link here).

One of the more famous RICO cases in recent times was the one against the Los Angeles Police Department.

In that litigation in federal court, the LAPD was held to be a "criminal enterprise" under that statute. Yep, a police department held to be a criminal enterprise. The judge was a conservative appointed by Ronald Reagan.

How much easier would it be to hold enterprises and consortiums of the type we are focusing on (which harbor communist spies, bilk governments, and the like) to be "criminal enterprises"?

It is probably worth a look see.

PS: Since treble damages are possible, it is easier to get legal counsel who are expert in this field to go with it.

Dredd, Bob, George -

I've had that article bookmarked for some time, as a sort of reassurance that there might be a way out of this criminal mess America finds itself in. But either nothing is being started along those lines or we're not hearing about it because of media malfeasance. I'm sure Conyers has thought of the same legal angle.

Cheryl -

Thanks for the Auntie Pinko link. I wonder if she's as pink as I'm becoming?

I pray that something like this, of a legal nature, will start to materialize.

It's odd. All my life, I've considered my self to be quite moderate, centrist. I didn't change, the power structure of the country did. Now it appears I'm on the left, just by being myself. With all of this political manipulation going on today, it's no longer even clear that there is a "center".

Re #21: I agree with you completely, Bob. There has been such a dramatic shift that the old descriptive words no longer mean anything. I think part of the problem comes from people who deliberately distort the language. For example, Bush calls himself a conservative yet many of his policies have nothing to do with traditional conservative values and attitudes. By any sane measure he's a radical --- a true conservative would be very concerned with balancing the budget and very wary of foreign entanglements. Bush embraces foreign entanglements and doesn't seem to care a whit about the budget. But he somehow gets away with calling himself a conservative. And therefore the people who oppose him are all lumped together under the category of "liberal". But this isn't true either. Many of those who oppose Bush are true conservatives. You see how screwed up this is getting? And this is only the beginning of the discussion!

Remember the Russian Revolution? There was a fragmenting of the revolutionaries and the smaller group took the name "Bolsheviks" (meaning "the majority"). They then called their opponents "Mensheviks" ("the minority") and by virtue of having given themselves a deceptive name they were in a position to rule the country. Who wants to join up with the Mensheviks?

Something similar is happening here. Bush and his cronies are "stealing" the political language so they can make it appear that everyone who opposes them is ultra-left (and therefore unworthy of attention). But this is not true, as you well know. In fact most of the country opposes them, and most of the world does too! I guess that makes us Mensheviks. Or something.

This is getting to be a long comment and I still haven't explained myself very well. Maybe I need a blog of my own. Oh yeah, I already have one. Someday maybe I'll write an essay about all this and post it there. This is one of the topics that has been bothering me for a long time. In the meantime, don't accept any labels, and keep up the good fight. We need to pay more attention to the issues and less attention to the labels anyway.

One more thing: please don't read my blog!

There is something inherently wrong with groupthink and labels to begin with, and therein lies its seeds of destruction. We are all highly individualistic by nature, and all political systems are bound for failure.

I have never identified with any of these systems. They are all drastically flawed as far as I can see. I've never identified with my ethnic and religious background either. I identify somewhat with being a female, but even that is subject to adjustment.

I think it is a mistake to adhere too tightly to a group even if it satisfies a need to belong temporarily. It seems that all groups turn on themselves ultimately. Maybe so as to reform and evolve. And usually the political ideals that were there in the beginning, become tainted and destructive.

One thing that might be good about this current situation is that everybody is so confused at this point, that the labels are becoming increasingly useless. So maybe people will be thinking a bit more deeply about their political views and come to some more self-understanding. There is a polarizing effect going on, but I think at the same time there is a lot of fragmentation, and I think both parties are going through major transformations. And I think the Republicans are in an even more self-destruct phase.
There is a lot to come.

Bush is a social conservative, but otherwise an extreme radical. He's happy to have people think of him as conservative, though, because that means he can't be a liberal.

And that's the whole point, isn't it? In today's politics, it isn't what you ARE that matters, it's what you AREN'T. Everything is negative. Non-partisan issues like election reform are framed as partisan; opposition to an illegal and immoral war is seen as unpatriotic; and dangerous federal deficits are deliberately created by the executive branch in order to force Congress to cut domestic spending.

As soon as "liberal" ceases to be a negative buzz word, things will change. Maybe the fact that Social Security "reform" is going over like a lead balloon is a positive sign.

It seems that these genius framers may have finally met their Waterloo with the Social Security scam. They changed the wording over and over--privatization to personal accounts, crisis to reform--and still it's a no-sell. They tried their usual smear campaign, and that flopped.
This might be a trend. The lead might be entering other balloons... or their feet.

It was a good thing for them while it lasted, but everything fizzles eventually.

Bush holds at about 49% approval in the polls. I suspect that's the real percentage of the vote he got in November...adjusting for fraud. Of that 49%, my guess is about half is comprised of people who don't necessarily like Bush, but simply hate liberals, war protestors, gays, wimps, Hollywood actors not named Reagan or Schwarzenegger, and anyone with an I.Q. over 100.

Bush has never had a mandate at any time during his presidency. If the Curtis/Feeney matter blows up, or Guckert/Gannon reveals complicity by the F.B.I. and/or Secret Service, then you'll see the real Domino Theory at work. The rats will be escaping all at once, and covering their assets by ratting on one another.

Watergate started with seemingly disconnected revelations that later came together under the rubric of "abuse of power." Stay tuned, folks.

Just my impression:

When I think of Bush, I think of "The Manchurian Candidate" (a pawn). My focus is on those back in the shadows, making his mouth work.

This lame nitwit got propped up as governor of Texas, and now president, with Karl Rove's, Cheney's, etc., hands up his bum (heavily funded by this neocon corporate machine), moving his head, and creating his dialogue.

Winter Patriot (#22): Good points. I think of Bush as somewhat inert, but those behind him are not conservative. They are fascist. And quite radical.

I had a lot of conservatives in my family, but none of them were like this bunch.

I think the puppetmasters are realizing they might have made a mistake with George Bush. He is truly destructive, and I think he might be helping to undo the PNAC experiment. A charismatic frontman is a must in a dictatorship, and that he isn't. Without a crisis, the people lose interest in him. He lacks potency, and no amount of strength behind him is enough to shore him up. He just doesn't cut it, and I think this will become more and more obvious.

The fact that the others are radicals is really to our benefit. I believe it is difficult for an extreme government to take hold. Maybe it requires extreme conditions, which we don't have now.
If they were subtle, and worked more behind the scenes, I think the situation would be much worse. And they are overanxious and inexperienced.

A totalitarian state grows organically out of a society as the need dictates. Are we really there?

re #27.

You're quite right, Bob, when you say "I think of Bush as somewhat inert, but those behind him are not conservative. They are fascist. And quite radical."

When I say "Bush is this, or Bush is that", I really mean "Bush is a puppet and the people pulling his strings are this, or that" ... It's a shorthand that we developed back in the days when presidential policies were formulated by presidents ...

By the way, do you ever get the impression that Tony Blair's strings are being pulled by the same people? It's almost as if those who pull the strings have found the perfect puppet for each audience ... I'm just thinking out loud here, but at least I'm thinking

Nail on the head, WP! I, also, don't mean Bush, the indidividual, but the insidous power-brokers who are lurking behind him.

Teresa, that first paragraph is so spot-on (#28) - "A charismatic frontman is a must in a dictatorship, and that he isn't. Without a crisis, the people lose interest in him."

The Richard Perle-driven PNAC Experiment would have been far better served by a more charismatic front-man, even Jeb Bush, who's a lot sharper then big bro, if they could have managed to get him to the top.

Dear Brad,
Thank you so much for the work that you are doing for our great Country. If “We the People” keep the pressure on Bush and his Band of Fools we can take back our precious White House. If possible do you think you could ask all of our anti-Bush groups to have petitions for impeachment ready to be signed on the day of the protest? If we have signed petitions to impeach Bush and are ready to go, we at this time would be ahead of the game. Your web site would be a great place to have such a notice. Let’s do this.

Who would Jesus bomb?

Hatred paralyzes life; Love releases it.
Hatred confuses life; Love harmonizes it.
Hatred darkens life; Love illuminates it.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate
cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

God Bless America, and those who reside in her Heart! bkh

Be good to yourself, and your world around you will be good to you! bkh

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" Mahatma Gandhi

Create Love, Know Peace, Understand Happiness! bkh

"....all things share the same breath....the beast, the tree, the man .... the air shares it's spirit with all the life it supports."Chief Seattle Dwamish

God is Watching bkh