Guest Blogged by David Safier of Blog for Arizona
Arizona’s election watchdog group, Audit AZ, went to the state Attorney General in its efforts to learn the truth about Pima County’s 2006 RTA (Regional Transportation Authority) election. Attorney Bill Risner handed Arizona AG Terry Goddard a letter detailing the evidence suggesting that the RTA election was flipped. The clearly written letter is accompanied by dozens of documents as well as video links to depositions and testimony from the 2007 court case Risner won for the Pima County Democratic Party. As a result of that case, every political party in the county has access to Diebold’s database files, recording how voters voted, from previous and future elections.
In May, 2007, on the heels of questions about the results of the ’06 RTA election following polls and previous elections in which similar initiatives were rejected by voters, the Arizona Attorney General’s office launched a criminal investigation into the RTA election. The software quality assurance firm, iBeta, was given computer databases to look over which indicated the vote counting might have been tampered with. Though iBeta saw instances of possible tampering, it decided they were simply the result of “human error.” Using tortured logic, iBeta said the signs of possible tampering were evidence that there was actually no tampering, since anyone who knew how to manipulate the data would also know how to cover their computer tracks and leave no evidence behind.
Risner’s letter explains how the direction of the AG’s investigation was, incredibly, set by the suspects themselves, members of the Pima County Elections Division. Those officials, Risner details, purposely turned the investigation away from the very evidence which could have proven their guilt in manipulating the results.
Those very same officials are named in a startling new affidavit from a former county employee who recently came forward to allege he was told by a Pima County election official that they had “fixed” the RTA election…
A number of anomalies indicating the RTA election was rigged are noted in Risner’s letter. Most of this information has been known for months and was even reported in the Tucson press as early as June, 2007, though never in such a complete, well-documented, and easy-to-understand format as Risner now summarizes the entire sordid affair.
A new piece of evidence was introduced at a July 9 press conference, as The BRAD BLOG detailed earlier this month. A sworn affidavit by Zbigniew Osmolski was entered into the record, in which he says that Bryan Crane, the computer operator of the Pima County Elections Division, “told me he ‘fixed’ the RTA, or Regional Transportation Authority, election on the instructions of his bosses and he did what he was told to do. Mr. Crane expressed his concern about being indicted and said he would like to talk but couldn’t trust anyone.”
The question of whether the election was flipped in the Diebold vote tabulation system could be put to rest by simply counting the still-existing paper ballots. (That assumes, of course, the ballots haven’t been tampered with since the election. Audit AZ is writing a list of necessary preconditions before an actual count takes place to ensure there has been a secure chain of custody and that the ballots counted would be the same ones the voters filled out.)
But getting ballots counted in Arizona isn’t easy. By law, the only times all the ballots in an election can be counted are when the results are within one-tenth of one percent or when the ballots are part of the evidence in a criminal investigation. Though the Pima County Board of Supervisors has recently declared they want the ballots counted and the Tucson dailies have written editorials asking to have the ballots counted as well, only Attorney General Goddard has the power to make it happen. This means that any resolution of the questions hanging over the RTA election is dependent on Goddard’s agreeing with the basic thrust of Risner’s letter, then reopening the investigation and demanding the ballots be counted.
Goddard has promised to read Risner’s letter and give it due consideration. However, according to John Brakey, co-founder of Audit AZ, “As of this date, no one from the AG’s office has replied to the letter, and I doubt that Terry Goddard will. He hasn’t responded before when we have sent him numerous other complaints and proofs of election fraud.”
Risner’s letter to AG Goddard, including links to evidentiary documentation, is posted in full here.
The answer is: Hand Counted Paper Ballots. Nothing less will be sufficient; nothing more is needed. Those who are against hand counted paper ballots are either ignorant or complicit with the election theft operation. Period.
With so little news coverage on serious problems like the one you report on here getting in the way of the will of the voters being realized, I was shocked to learn about the frontpage story in USA Today where the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law claims its study shows that ballot design is the only problem we have.
Election fraud is all over, the GOP is caging votes, wiping voters off the voting rolls, and we see the privatization of the election process and yet this study says there isn’t an instance where a computer has fouled-up a vote by itself.
What is this nonsense about?
I look forward to getting some analysis on this study (it sounds like a red herring to me). In the meantime, thank you for covering the other problems that aren’t so obvious.
If you care about election integrity and want to make sure that your vote is counted as cast, then PLEASE CONTACT ATTORNEY GENERAL GODDARD’S OFFICE and insist that he reopen the criminal case in the 2006 RTA election on the basis of this new evidence and order a recount of the ballots. Here is the AG’s contact info:
Attorney General Terry Goddard
Office of the Attorney General
1275 West Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007
602.542.5025
800.352.8431 (toll free)
Fax 602.542.4085
Email aginfo@azag.gov
This is a short video clip of Attorney Bill Risner deposing Bryan Crane 2/27/07. It’s a must see clip of a very nervous, guilt ridden county election computer operator. After watching this you can understand what guilt does and why Crane confessed to Zbgniew Osmolski.
Osmolski Affidavit, quotes Bryan Crane as saying that he was told to fix the election by his bosses, it is clear that County management has a potential motive to obstruct an investigation just as they have done.
A press report last week quoted Bryan Crane as saying he had to look up on a map where the Boondocks Bar was located. However he got there, he was seen that evening by another available witness who knows Mr. Crane. Mr. Osmolski related his conversation with Mr. Crane to four separate people at the bar that evening.
Confession is good for the soul.
Jim March and I are genuinely concerned for this guy.
Crane obviously knows a lot.
All this suggests he’s a weak link in a criminal enterprise involving very powerful people”¦and that’s not a healthy thing to be in anywhere.
Jim March and I are advocating that Bryan Crane get immunity in exchange for giving up the big bosses in Pima County running an election fraud scheme.
As Attorney Bill Risner says in the letter to the Attorney General Terry Goddard:.
“The truthfulness of Mr. Crane’s confession can readily be determined by examining the ballots. As noted by Michael Shamos, the proof is in the ballots.”
Lets hope the RTA ballots are recounted before
we find ourselves in the midst of the upcoming
fall elections.
Thanks and Good Luck
As is well known, Arizona Politics have been run since the time of Kemper Marley by the Liquor and gambling interests of the Lansky-Bronfman organized crime syndicate. A little thing like the flipping of a vote should not surprise anyone. The gang in charge is busy right now trying to figure out how they’re going to get their darling “War Hero” John McCain of Keating five fame, elected President of the whole Country, thus delivering the Nation into the hands of the Mob. Of course, the Republican Party has been largely controlled by the Syndiicate since the time of Richard Nixon – remember Frank Fitzsimmons? But – I dunno – rule by the crime families might be preferable to rule by big oil. In neither case do the people want what they’re likely to get, but honest politics became an oxymoron a generation ago.
We’ve had two years to fight for paper ballots and rid the possibilty of another rigged election. We now near another major, very important election with the Repubs absolutely desperate to stay in power with a truly inadequate candidtate . . . What do you think these scoundrals will do? Scares me . . .
Tedegger, I agree with you about “Arizona Politics have been run since the time of Kemper Marley by the Liquor and”¦” however I would also add ‘Land Fraud’ See the IRE History | The Arizona Project, land fraud and organized crime made his murder a cowardly act” The 1976, Arizona Republic reporter Don Bolles, one of IRE’s founding members, was called to meeting in a downtown Phoenix hotel by a source promising him information about land fraud involving organized crime. The source didn’t show up. Bolles left the hotel, got into his car parked outside and turned the key. A powerful bomb ripped through the car, leaving Bolles mortally injured.
“Over the next 10 days, doctors amputated both Bolles’ legs and an arm, but could not save him”
Nothing is fixed till we know why it broke.
This is a good read into recent history of organized crime in Arizona http://www.ire.org/history/arizona.html
This points out something weird about election forensics in general. In other fields, like accounting, when something doesn’t look right you don’t see the auditor speculating about motivation. In other words, an auditor will just say something like “due to missing checks and balances, we decline to state any opinion on the accuracy of the results” — and everyone knows what that means: The people might have been cheating, but REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY WERE OR WERE NOT, the breakdown in checks and balances alone means that the results cannot be trusted.
You also see auditors writing things like “funds collected were not deposited into the account. Mr. [name] should repay the funds.” Note that this sidesteps whether Mr. [name] stole the funds or it was “human error” — auditors don’t care.
Sometimes you even see auditors writing things like this: “Due to the missing checks and balances and therefore, the high risk of fraud, we have disclaimed any opinion on the accuracy of the financial reports provided. We have contacted the prosecuting attorney.”
In elections, time after time, we see these election consultants and state officials tripping over themselves in their haste to say there was no foul play, that it was “human error.”
Every embezzler tries to build in plausible deniability. In a sane world, that doesn’t get them off the hook.
To follow up on one of my earlier questions, about Mr. Osmolski, as John Brakey clarified, Osmolski was indeed someone who had worked for the county, and had been involved in a prior whistleblowing action. It would be interesting to find out more about that.
We tend to see the same faces on the periphery of various scandals. The current one, about elections, would appear to connect to land developers and whoever they hold sway with at the county supervisor level. How many of the sups are the same now as before when Osmolski blew the whistle? And wasn’t that a transportation issue, and this toasted election is a transportation bond issue?
I have no doubt that Brakey and March are following the money trail on this. If government investigators are (inappropriately) proclaiming “human error” instead of just reporting the facts, somehow I have more faith in Brakey & March getting to the bottom of this than the A.G.
Sad state of affairs.
#1 Patriot,
You wrote
“The answer is: Hand Counted Paper Ballots. Nothing less will be sufficient; nothing more is needed…”
Your first sentence addresses the future. We have to address the present, and deal with crimes by investigating & prosecuting them, no matter how long it takes or who is in office.
Just as Obama adviser Cass Sunstein, at Friday’s netroots convention, said we should ignore all the Bushcrime (good band name?) of the last 7-8 years, election officials want this Pima county situation swept under the rug with everything else.
No. It’s a crime, goddammit. Maybe it’s already too late, but until they close the borders and have goddamn microchips implanted in all our brains, we can’t give up.
PRESS RELEASE
From Beth Ford, Pima County Treasurer
July 21, 2008
In my role as Pima Country Treasurer, I intend to file a declaratory judgment action in Pima County Superior Court on Tuesday of this week, requesting that the Court determine my obligations pursuant to §16-624 of the Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”) with respect to the Pima County ballots from the May 16, 2006, special election for the establishment of the Regional Transportation Authority, as well as the Pima County ballots from the 2006 primary and general elections.
A.R.S. §16-624 provides that in a local election, such as the one establishing the Regional Transportation Authority, the County Treasurer shall maintain the ballots for a period of six months after the election. This statute also requires the County Treasurer to maintain ballots for an election involving a federal office, such as the 2006 primary and general elections, for a period of twenty-four months. In the event that a recount has not been ordered or legal action has not been initiated within a six-month period, the statute requires the County Treasurer to destroy the ballots.
Following the May 16, 2006, special election, I retained possession of the ballots for the required six-month period, and, upon the advice of the Pima County Attorney’s Office, I continued to retain them thereafter throughout the course of legal proceedings that were initiated by the Democratic Party of Pima County in which it sought the disclosure of elections databases and contended that the 2006 election ballots for Pima County, including the Regional Transportation Authority election ballots, were relevant to those proceedings.
The Court has issued a final Order in the action that was initiated by the Democratic Party and the time for an appeal has expired. I am thus faced with the issue of whether, pursuant to A.R.S. §16-624, I am now required to destroy the May 16, 2006, election ballots. On June 27, 2008, I wrote a letter to each of the political parties represented in the election advising them of the provisions of A.R.S. §16-624. In my letter, I indicated that if the recipient of the letter objected to having the ballots destroyed pursuant to A.R.S. §16-624, the recipient should notify me of such objection by July 11, 2008. My letter also stated that if I received any objections, I would not destroy the ballots but instead would seek guidance from the Pima County Superior Court by filing an action for a declaratory judgment.
The Democratic and Libertarian Parties of Pima County timely notified me of their objections to having the Regional Transportation Authority ballots destroyed. I also received a similar objection letter from two members of the Pima County Board of Supervisors and understand that the Board as a whole and the Pima County Manager may request that the ballots be retained. Therefore, I intend to initiate the action for a declaratory judgment. Although the twenty-four month periods following the 2006 primary and general elections have not yet expired, they will soon expire. I have been advised that some of the political parties may object to the destruction of the ballots from those elections as well; therefore, in the declaratory judgment action, I will also request the Court’s determination as to my obligations in retaining or destroying those ballots. My legal counsel has been in contact with attorneys in the Pima County Attorney’s Office and the Arizona Attorney General’s Office, and attorneys representing the Democratic, Republican and Libertarian parties to coordinate in a cooperative fashion this upcoming legal filing.
I do not intend to take a position in the declaratory judgment action concerning whether the ballots should be retained or destroyed. I simply wish to obtain direction from the Court concerning the proper handling of these ballots in light of A.R.S. §16-624 and the objections that have been raised.