Who is Douglas Jones?

well, so long as he's talking about them, i mean, that's at least something. let's get the wingnuts on our side with this: "mexican atheists build chicom computer parts using gay math to count your votes!" or something.

Here's what frosts me about Lou Dobbs. He didn't give a shit about e-vote fraud...until foreigners possibly owned one of the companies. And that company is the ONLY one he cares about.

Side note: On the Daily Show, they showed a clip of Cher calling in on C-SPAN, and she said over the phone that Lou Dobbs was one of her best friends. Cher often calls C-SPAN, it said.

Christopher Bollyn of American Free Press wrote about this exact thing months ago, before Lou Dobbs went off on it...

Who Owns Sequoia?

"...Lou all blustery and nearly spitting..."???

He looked cool as a cucumber to me! Or am I missing the sarcasm?

It's quite evident that a dysfunctional electoral system is just peachy with the crackerjack investigative "reporters" who are guarding our democracy. So far, the "reports" they've given us are worthy of Saturday Night Live.
I love this comment:
"...SHOULD a thief get in a position of power..."!!!

Right! Gee, if THAT ever happened I guess we'd have to start worrying!
It sure is a good thing that the people running our government are all so above reproach.

The story is, a foreign country can control the U.S. voting, if e-vote machines can be hacked. Now, in this case, it would be Hugo Chavez, so that's a "no-no", because rich elites in America (the GOP) hate populist Hugo Chavez. So, now, that's not OK. Although the problem existed since the existence of e-vote machines, the non-security of our votes.

On a side note, I always wished Brad would get together with Christopher Bollyn, because he is the only other person writing about e-vote fraud, but not nearly as much as Brad. But he's #2, although a distant #2.

Correction: Brad & Bev Harris are in a class all by themselves. Christopher Bollyn is the only other person "regularly" writing about e-vote fraud. Others write about it, but not "regularly", and in an investigative nature.

I certainly appreciated Lou's final statement about a dysfunctional government trying to render our election process the same. Getting on the boat late is better than not getting on the boat.

"Well, we know what we're dealing with, and it is a dysfunctional government that is trying to render our elections precisely the same ... we will continue reporting on what is an outright threat to our democracy, to the integrity of our voting system, and to our elections process." (Lou Dobbs)

Wow, another conspiracy buff joins our ranks. Sometimes you have to let ... certain people ... into the "6 or 7" even tho you know they are a bit slow.

Whatever ... gotta keep on truckin ... keep on rockin in the free world.

Lou is a hammerhead, but the only thing I've been noticing is the Battle lines are coming into focus now
Its Populism (our side) vs Fascism (the false freedom side)
Repusses & the DLC take notice
They can put down Chavez all they want, but he might be our hope for the return back to the Peoples Government, to the true meaning of this country and possibly this hemisphere too, will follow

Last week I commented here at BradBlog on part one of Dobbs' Sequoia report. Shortly thereafter, not content to stop ranting yet, I decided to revise it slightly and add a few paragraphs: Will the Misleading Never End?

Lou shows that he doesn't "get it", yet. The big picture is not whether or not a voting machine company is foreign owned... thank goodness Kitty hit the nail on the head:

Kitty Pilgrim: "The big worry for U.S. elections is Smartmatic and other voting machine companies are private companies. They have proprietary software that they can call a trade secret. Electronic voting experts with extensive experience say it's nearly impossible to verify if a proprietary system is tamper-proof."

Pilgrim later said: "Some voter watchdog groups and others in congress are calling for a full review and say the ownership of all electronic voting companies should be reviewed to determine if it poses a risk to U.S. elections."

The Diebold CEO's promise to deliver Ohio to bush in 2004 pops into my head when I read the above quote, esp. considering all the irregularities that did occur in Ohio. And all of the other places where irregularities have occurred. I hope they will get more coverage by the MSM.

"DOUGLAS JONES, ASSOC. PROF., UNIV. OF IOWA: All of the voting system vendors in the United States are private companies. The problem is the closed-door proprietary nature of the process. The closed system we have right now makes it extremely hard to find out what's going on, and that means that should a thief get in a position of power, we would never know. "

You mean like the three convicted felons who helped write Diebold's software? But, we DO know about that; I'm sorry you didn't mention it.

"Richard in Union City writes, "I trust my vote is counted. If you begin to think it doesn't count, then you become too cynical and you stop voting.""

Well, the Rs are trying to lead us into fascism, and if enough people don't vote, that's just where we'll end up, Richard.

"And Rick in San Diego writes, "Sure, I believe our vote counting system is honest. If you don't believe me, just ask President Gore.""

Rick does get it!

Yeaaa to Jack Cafferty!

I just read Hannan's Kitty Pilgrim quotes after I made my previous comment. I didn't watch Lou Dobbs yesterday (after being frustrated with last week's report), so I must commend Pilgrim on making such helpful comments. That is encouraging.

Wildly wishful thinking: Maybe she and Dobbs (or at least Pilgrim alone) are ever so carefully --- deviously --- working their way around CNN's neocon censors. Maybe their report on foreign (or at least Venezuelan) ownership of a voting-maching company is merely the trojan-horse method of talking about the electronic-voting scandal in this country.

Yes, as I say, that is wildly wishful thinking. The skeptic, the optimist and the realist in me are equally powerful (or weak), and every day, all day long, they battle it out with one another like the Three Stooges during Happy Hour.

WELFL: I thought the same thing about Maureen Dowd's piece on a 9/11 inside job. She "seemed" to be calling everyone "conspiracy theorists"...BUT...she gave links and information to a lot of credible 9/11 sites like st911.org , etc... So, she got exposure to an inside 9/11 job in the NYTimes, no matter what. That's all that counts. Maybe Dobbs/Pilgrim are doing the same thing. Exposure is exposure, in the MSM.

EATIE AMEN SAYS:

"I WILL DELIVER THE HOLY VOTE
TO HE WHO HEARS GOD
IN THE HOUSE OF WHITE"

"Well, we know what we're dealing with, and it is a dysfunctional government that is trying to render our elections precisely the same ... we will continue reporting on what is an outright threat to our democracy, to the integrity of our voting system, and to our elections process." (Lou Dobbs, bold added)

What he does not understand is that the central location of that dysfunctional government is Ohio (link here).

Big Dan, you may have a point regarding Dowd. If she had written a true hit piece, she would not have provided links to the most credible and scholarly of all the research sites.

The jury is still out on this NYT article from yesterday: 500 Conspiracy Buffs Meet... It's hard to tell if the author, Alan Feuer, is damning with faint praise, or praising with faint damnation. He indulges in a few irritating stereotypes, but he generally gets the message out, that there is such a movement. Furthermore, he, too, has provided links to two or three of the most credible sites.

the importance of the election issue, the critical role of the media, and doing something about it.

Election Fraud, the Media, and the Right Focus

.......

Lou Dobbs

Why is it a no-no to sell voting machine companies to foreign countries in the Americas, but not a no-no to sell our military factories and ports to the unstable mid-east countries? (link here).

Are things getting curiouser and curioser again?

the importance of the election issue, the critical role of the media, and doing something about it.

Election Fraud, the Media, and the Right Focus

Let's see, now. We know antitrust laws aren't being enforced in the United States. Not at all. We also know Sequoia's parent company is owned by Venezuelans, and that Diebold is a troubled company whose stock is depressed (around 42).

So what's to prevent Sequoia's parent company from doing a hostile takeover of Diebold? With oil prices soaring, the Venezuelan currency should be strong relative to the dollar, making Diebold a bargain. I wonder if the investment bankers in New York and Caracas are working on this.

The combined company could then buy E.S & S., which would be in a disadvantageous position from trying to compete with Sequoia-Diebold. It would be happy to sell out. This would put our election system entirely in Venezuelan hands, and if nothing else it would assure that Jeb Bush would never become president. But Hugo Chavez might, if he agreed to sell us oil for $20 a barrel.

Seems as if CNN is beginning to wake up.

The sleeping MSM: A giant wakes up?
"Fe, Fie, Foe, Fum. I smell the blood of a Venezuelan."

"...Lou all blustery and nearly spitting..."???

He looked cool as a cucumber to me! Or am I missing the sarcasm?

It's quite evident that a dysfunctional electoral system is just peachy with the crackerjack investigative "reporters" who are guarding our democracy. So far, the "reports" they've given us are worthy of Saturday Night Live.
I love this comment:
"...SHOULD a thief get in a position of power..."!!!

Right! Gee, if THAT ever happened I guess we'd have to start worrying!
It sure is a good thing that the people running our government are all so above reproach.

Lou Dobbs

You said "Well, we know what we're dealing with, and it is a dysfunctional government that is trying to render our elections precisely the same ... we will continue reporting on what is an outright threat to our democracy, to the integrity of our voting system, and to our elections process."

But what you do not know is that you are being used by that government, the US Government, to spread propaganda.

A very good article in Columbia Journalism Review concerning the efforts of the republican dictatorship to completely destabilize the press thru psy ops is linked here.

One interesting quote from the article is:

"Sam Gardiner ... retired Air Force colonel ... monitored the press coverage and parsed the public statements of military and administration officials, he ... became ... deeply concerned ... They clearly had a completely domestic focus. They were part of the effort to re-elect the president . . . . I’m going to be real pejorative here: Their goal was psychological operations on the American voting public. That was part of the political arm doing that" (ibid).

Are things getting curiouser and curioser again, or have we just now entertained the term republican dictatorship?

I sense a growing Despoitc government, edging toward a Dictatorship, bent on Reigning through the works of a Fascist Regime.

14 points of Fascism
http://oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm

Despotism ~ A 1946 film
http://video.google.com/...02527420&q=despotism

Oops, sorry for the seeminly spam, but it's all related to the sleeping giants of media mogals/conglomerations:

http://www.nydailynews.c...y/...4p-357731c.html
half way down page

STEWART ON NET ASSETS That was Comedy Central's Jon Stewart cutting up while emceeing yesterday's Peabody Awards for broadcasting excellence at the Waldorf-Astoria. "This afternoon's program is sponsored by your Internet and phone records," Stewart told the star-studded crowd. "Isn't that interesting — your Internet and phone records, because 'blah blah blah, 9-11.'" In case anyone missed his point, Stewart also quipped: "Thomas Jefferson once said: 'Of course the people don't want war. But the people can be brought to the bidding of their leader. All you have to do is tell them they're being attacked and denounce the pacifists for somehow a lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.' I think that was Jefferson. Oh wait. That was Hermann Goering. Shoot."

NOW THERE'S SOME TRUTH.

Voting Unconstitutionally

In 1677 the British enacted a law called the Statute of Frauds and Perjuries.

The Statute of Frauds and Perjuries was based upon the premise that without paper evidence of the essential terms of a business transaction, the transaction was ripe for fraud and the case became little more than a contest of who was the best perjurer.

Ever since its enactment, the "Statute of Frauds" has been used to throw out of court most business transaction cases which are not based upon a proper paper record.

The Statute of Frauds became the law of the colonies, and later, of each and every state, because the courts recognized the value of a proper paper record as a deterrent to fraud and perjury.

Likewise for most of the USA's history, it was recognized that a paper ballot was the best electoral fraud prevention device known to man.

After all, voting is also a transaction, a transaction between the government and the people.

But in the early twentieth century our legislatures lost sight of the principle of the Statute of Frauds and began to eradicate paper-based voting systems. That was a huge mistake.

We need to again recognize the principle that paper is the greatest deterrent to fraud ever invented.

We need a national statute of frauds for voting. Not just for some but for all of us.

Some of you may know that I have filed my own lawsuit here in Tennessee challenging the constitutionality of voting paperless. You can see a Kos diary of mine on the allegations of the lawsuit here:

http://www.dailykos.com/...ory/2005/11/27/7178/5540

The case is now on appeal and you can also access a pdf of my appellate brief here:

http://dragonflihost.net...Mills_Election_Brief.pdf

After many months of looking at the election process, it has dawned on me that we need to look at the election process in reverse. We need to look at the best means of having an effective and efficient election contest lawsuit first, and then work backwards. Imagine an election lawsuit without any paper ballots as proof of who won. It is utterly ridiculous. Follow me.

First let's look at example of a business transaction lawsuit without paper. Suppose you have been defrauded of ten grand. You come to me. I ask if you had a contract. You say no. You also tell me you have no cancelled check because the transaction was cash. You also tell me you have no receipt. You don't even have any written correspondence. You have no witnesses. (Keep in mind for the moment that voting is supposed to be secret and there are no witnesses).

Tell me how am I supposed to prove you have been the victim of a business fraud! It is your word against the fraudsters'. It becomes a case of which one of you can lie the best. Now you can see why we have had the Statute of Frauds for over three hundred years. Paper deters the fraud and stops the perjury contest. In fact, if I were to bring such a case, the courts would consider it to be a frivolous lawsuit. The statute of frauds is so established, that to bring a case in violation of it, would almost insure a harsh rebuke and sanction by the Court.

Now lets look at two different types of voting election contests --- one with paper and one without. Watch what paper does for the election contest lawsuit.

In the first case there are paper ballots. A challenger asks the court to subpoena all of the paper ballots. Once the ballots get to the courthouse, the paper ballots can be marked as evidence (just like a contract, or a cancelled check, or a receipt or a letter of correspondence) and be handed to the jury to count. After the jury's verdict of who got the most votes, the judge declares a winner. The case is fast, cheap, highly effective and final. Plus you have a significant fraud deterrent. Anyone who monkeys with this system has a good chance of being caught.

Contrast that with the case of no paper, like the DRE's everyone is pushing us to vote on, (and like I will be voting on and have voted on). The election contest now becomes a battle of whose software expert is the best. The challenger and his expert will face overwhelming odds. The Challenger's expert will likely have to testify without ever getting to properly examine the equipment. Why? Because the equipment is owned by private manufacturers who assert that their software is proprietary and is a trade secret. Before the challenger can ever get his expert to examine the equipment he has to endure the huge expense of a trade secrets' war.

At best, the second type of lawsuit only convinces the court that there was enough doubt to warrant a new election and so the challenger's best hope is to end up on the same merry-go-round. Does this second kind of case deter fraud? Absolutely not. It encourages fraud. A fraudster knows he is likely never to get caught gaming this system. A perjury contest has been replaced with an expert opinion contest. May the best expert win. Just a variation on the theme of the he said / she said lawsuit. Unfortunately, this expert contest is rigged against the challenger because of the trade secret problems and the trade secret wars. It might be even worse than an old fashioned perjury contest.

My lawsuit is an equal protection lawsuit. It argues that some of the citizens of my state get to vote on a paper-based fraud deterrent system while the rest of us have to vote on a paperless fraud inducing system. It argues that this is patently unfair to those who have to vote on the paperless fraud inducing system. It argues that we should all get to vote on a paper-based system.

When you have no legal redress for fraud, fraud will be rampant when the stakes are high enough. RFK, Jr. and others have always been right to question the 2004 election.

Given that so many people voted on paperless systems around the country, the question should never have been: "Was there any proof of fraud?" Given the spending of $500 million per side, the stakes were extremely high. The question should have always been: "Just how rampant was the fraud?"

Face it. It happened. The stakes were too high and the legal checks and balances were not there to prevent it.

Now do you understand why there should be no corporations using DRE's to vote on? They can't seem to make one with paper that actually works. The best compromise to hand-counted paper ballots is optiscan where the ballots are pre-printed and can always be counted by hand. Nothing short of that works.

The statute of frauds is a doctrine heavily relied upon by the corporate community to screw teh little guy. Wouldn't it be sweet to turn the tables on them with a voting statute of frauds?

I have said it before - but it bears repeating, so I will at every chance I get. The ONLY reason to have Electronic voting machines in the first place is

so that the ELECTION CAN BE RIGGED!

That's it - that's all - the minutiae of the debate; ownership, proprietory software, faulty ballots etc, - all of that is irrelevant. the answer is NOT to fix them - it is to get rid of the damned machines alltogether!!

I voted in today (June 6, 2006) in Campbell, California. The voting machine that I used had the following identification on the back: Sequoia Voting System Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail P/N 20160. It was further identified with the following number: 460-32400-00 Rev B. This machine was very easy to use and navigate. It also had a paper roll (similar to an adding machine roll, but wider) that recorded your vote. You are able to review the printout to determine if the vote was correctly registered by the machine. I checked the vote printout and it registered accurately.

I did not discover the paper printout until I asked one of the people at the polling place where the printout was. The person pointed out that it was on the side of the machine. The voter could not see the printout due to the way the machine was set up at this polling place. This appeared not to be the fault of the polling assitance people, but that they had not been shown how to properly set up the "privacy screen" on the machines so the voter could see the printout. I did not ask if the machines came with set up instructions, but my guess is that they did.

I was pleased to see that there was an accurate printout using the Sequoia machine. The last time I voted, this type of machine was not used and the voter had no idea if the vote was accurately registered. At that time, I tried to find out who made that machine and there was no easily seen marking on the machine or the back of the machine that identified the maker. Possibly the maker's identification was on the bottom of the machine. I am pleased to see that this type of machine with no paper audit trail has been replaced by a Sequoia machine that DOES PROVIDE AN AUDIT PAPER TRAIL.

I am not sure if the Sequoia Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail machines are being used throughout California.

I believe that whatever system is used should provide an audit paper trail that can be easily reviewed to determine if tampering has occurred. I sincerely believe that voting machines without an audit paper trail are a serious threat to our democracy.

I voted in today (June 6, 2006) in Campbell, California. The voting machine that I used had the following identification on the back: Sequoia Voting System Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail P/N 20160. It was further identified with the following number: 460-32400-00 Rev B. This machine was very easy to use and navigate. It also had a paper roll (similar to an adding machine roll, but wider) that recorded your vote. You are able to review the printout to determine if the vote was correctly registered by the machine. I checked the vote printout and it registered accurately.

I was pleased to see that there was an accurate printout using the Sequoia machine. The last time I voted, this type of machine was not used and the voter had no idea if the vote was accurately registered. At that time, I tried to find out who made that machine and there was no easily seen marking on the machine or the back of the machine that identified the maker. Possibly the maker's identification was on the bottom of the machine. I am pleased to see that this type of machine with no paper audit trail has been replaced by a Sequoia machine that DOES PROVIDE AN AUDIT PAPER TRAIL.

I am not sure if the Sequoia Voter Verified Paper Audit Trail machines are being used throughout California.

I believe that whatever system is used should provide an audit paper trail that can be easily reviewed to determine if tampering has occurred. I sincerely believe that voting machines without an audit paper trail are a serious threat to our democracy.

Lou Dobbs has the guts to tackle another tough issue. Next maybe he'll talk about the inside job on 9/11, ask questions why the gov't forced book outlets to stop stocking 'America Deceived' by E.A. Blayre III and figure out why Ernst Zundel is in prison. He's the last responsible journalist left.
The last link before Google Books pulls it:
http://www.iuniverse.com...?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

At least he is starting to mention it. The more people that get interested, the sooner we will be able to win. I have noticed that many people like to absorb thing slowly. I think the corporate media is getting to the point that they can not ignore the loss of democracy much longer.

With the election season now on us, more and more candidates will bring up the lack of confidence in the election process (especially me) and the press will have to be ready with either an explanation as to why they did not cover it or a trickling of stories that proved that they did.

We just have to keep the pressure on.

Clint Curtis for Congress

to coin a phrase..... "This is just the tip of the iceberg" But I am glad that the media is FINALLY (after the 2000, '02, '04 elections) paying some attention to this problem. The 2006 election is the crucial test of how much of a Democracy remains in America.

Jane Birkenstock #29,#30

The fact that there is a piece of paper, hopefully given to you to take with you, does not end the matter.

It only begins it.

A full audit is one that verifies that your vote was counted properly.

The bottom line totals must add up to all the votes cast.

The bottom line totals must likewise match the exit polls before there is any consideration as to how well the election went.

When I get a printed receipt at the ATM that is only the beginning.

I then cross check it with the activity ledger at the end of the month to make sure that the receipt I was give matches properly in the ledger of activity for the month.

That is an audit trail ... a paper trail. Everything has to add up ... or "it just doesn't add up"

Please take my junk mail and print paper ballots,kill two birds with one stone.

#26 Brilliant. Thank you.

voting should be paper, no exceptions. unless the plan is to rig the election.

Lou Dobbs has lost his mind about immegration threads. Any voting system, regardless which company offers it, which does not have a trace log or check points is just ridiculous.
Computer software - even today - has lot's of bugs. To implement a protocol printer is the minimum of a cross check. A company which tell the authorities this costs to much money should not be regognized as a supplier!

C'mon, we're all on the same side here versus the Dynamic Duo of Gas and Oil, Bush and Dick, but let's give Lou the credit he deserves- No other MSM anchor comes anywhere near his honesty. He is the only one on TV that regularly calls the Washington crowds "idiots" and the only one that calls it like it is. He rightfully and truthfully and repeatedly accuses Bush and Dick of being the "Corporate President" for their consistent policy of putting corporate interests first. He always rails against the trillion dollar deficit and trade deficit caused by the "no big government crowd" ,y'know the ones that call us the tax and spend crowd?I think we need him and his platform, no?

I went to the link Mike Hill put in his post. I am appalled to find there is a homeland security warning: possession of this novel may result in unlimited detention. Welcome to the police state! For a BOOK? In America? Interesting subject matter. This government goes too far. I feel like I'm living in a parallel universe. WTF!

Let's give Lou Dobbs credit for mentioning this subject at all.

As one who worked with the late Collier Brothers (Votescam: The Stealing of America) since the early 1980s on this issue --- please believe that at the top both "left" and "right" are equally in on votescam. The main votescam companies (Diebold, Sequioa, ES & S) appear to be all owned by the same people --- one "company" hiding behind three companies.

For instance, Moveon.org is a total "phony opposition" group. Paper ballots are not the issue --- but --- paper ballots AND the counting of those paper ballots at the neighborhood precinct by the neighborhood people right at closing time on election day --- that's the issue. THAT's what moveon.org and all the other phonies, left and right, will NOT tolerate.

When someone says, "We need paper ballots in case we need a recount." IN CASE? How about a real count in the first place?

Once the ballots leave the view of the neighborhood people, the ball game is over - the chain of evidence is broken.

Finally, while a number of people over the years have fretted about "foreign ownership" of our vote-counting system, this is way off point, as some have noted on this blog. The implication seems to be that a "crook" could get access to the system and warp and election. LISTEN UP: THE CROOKS ARE THE ONES WHO OWN THESE COMPANIES AND SET UP THIS SYSTEM OF COMPUTERIZED VOTE COUNTING WHICH BARS CITIZEN PARTICIPATION. And who helps these crooks?

Answer: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX, AP WIRE have covered this story up for 30 years. This tells us that no matter what holding companies are the front owners of this company --- the Big Media/ CIA/ Federal Reserve Banksters are the owners of the computerized votescam.

The other punchline --- unmentioned by almost all: the two groups behind these companies (and the TV Networks, and the FED) are Anglo-Freemasony (i.e., Skull & Bones, Bush Family) and the Zionist Jewish worldwide Network (fronted for by Clinton, Chertoff, etc. etc. --- and now W. Bush too).

Don't make the mistake of thinking it's the Republicans only. Clinton was chosen by this Ruling Elite in 1992, W. Bush in 2000, and probably a Dem again in 2008 for President. Bush = Gore; Gore = Bush. And so on.

The answer is above: paper ballots counted by the neighbors of all factions in the precincts at closing time --- machine free elections.

For more "big picture" analysis: www.votefraud.org

Jim Condit Jr.

davidgmills:

I wish you lived in Utah. We've been wishing we could find a lawyer around here to take this case. Good luck with your cause. Maybe some of it will spill over here!

Clint Curtis:

You've got a lot a courage! If I wasn't still out of work, I would send you some cash. Your race is definitely as important as they come, even if it's not in my home state. The national media should be ashamed of themselves for not picking up their phone and calling you!

Thank You Sir!

Laura #39

I think that was part of the title...a satire, if you will.

SR you think so? I don't know I was pretty freaked out reading it . I tried googling the title and came up with nothing. The homeland security warning was on the page of the seller not in the title of the book.

Thanks Soul Rebel you are exactly right. I went back and took a better look. I feel like an ass,but it still did freak me out !

Even rattlesnakes shed their skins very two or three months. But not at CNN:

What Kitty Pilgrim DIDN"T say about SmartMatic/Sequoia --- which further proves that Dobbs, CNN, and Pilgrim are little more than shills for the Neo-Cons:

The National Endowment for Democracy --- the "civilian" branch of the CIA --- is said to have provided the funds for Penn, Schoen & Berland to "survey" the Venezuelan Recall Election in 2004.

This is what "Common Dreams" had to say about Penn, Shoen, and Berland's exit polling survey of the Chavez recall vote:

"As Venezuelan opposition groups continue to dispute President Hugo Chavez' landslide victory in last Sunday's referendum, they have relied heavily on an exit poll by Penn, Shoen, Berland and Associates. This poll of 20,000 voters, released Sunday evening at 8 p.m., showed President Chavez losing by a margin of 59-41 percent --- almost the exact opposite of the official results, which were certified by international observers from the Carter Center and the Organization of American States.

CEPR's analysis shows that, given the certified result, the odds of finding a random sample of voters as Penn, Shoen, and Berland reported were less than 1 in 10 to the 490th power. This is less than the odds of winning the lottery every week consecutively for an entire year. The methodology of this poll must therefore be called into question.
CEPR's analysis further shows that the result --- that Chavez would win --- was easily predictable from pre-election polling.

"Many press accounts had reported the election as "too close to call," but the probability of getting a random sample of 2000 respondents that would fall within the margin of error --- i.e. too close to call --- were less than one in 50 million. And in fact the most recent (Aug. 4-8) poll by Evans/McDonough Company (EMC) and Varianzas Opinion of a nationwide sample of 2000 accurately predicted the results of the referendum."

The Harvard professor used-- Ricardo Hausmann ---
had other reasons to "verify" results of Penn, Schoen, & Berland's findings:

Hausmann, from Venezuela's upper class, was Chief Economist of the Inter-American Development Bank from 1994 to 2000. He was also Venezuelan Finance Minister and a Board Member of Venezuela' Central Bank under the previous Venezuelan government.

That government was the one that Chavez attempted to overthrow in 1992. The democratically-elected Chavez government that took power in 1999 also served to put Hausmann and Gustavo Colonel out of office.

A few months after his "study" of the Chavez recall Hausmann was promoted to head Harvard's Center for International Development at the JFK School of Government In February, 2005.

That the US government is conducting a campaign of harrassment, lies, and slanted news coverage of Hugo Chavez is undeniable.

However, Pilgrim's report was not only intended to smear Chavez but likely to have been a White House dictated "red herring" to take the focus off Diebold, E & S, or anybody else doing their dirty work. They knew irregularities would be found on Tuesday --- especially in the "bellweather" California 50th Congressional District. They read the same test results of faulty and hackable voting machines that the rest of the world does. :hehe:

So we STILL don't know --- as far as CNN can tell us --- whether SmartMatic/Sequoia's voting machines actually do the job or not.

Penn, Schoen, & Berland used a biased source with an "ax to grind" to verify the results. It all seems so well choreographed --- and the latest in a statistical whitwash perpetrated by the thieves in power.

FUNNY HOW THE MSM AND THE BUSHEVIKS USE "EXIT" POLLING OVERSEAS TO VERIFY THE RESULTS THEY WANT BUT DISCREDIT EXIT POLLS IN US ELECTIONS AS "NO LONGER RELIABLE." :crazy:

Actually, the Chavez Recall Vote Fraud story has been around the block several times. However, it seems to re-appear during elections where e-voting machines are in use. What a coincidence.