Guest blogged by David Edwards of Veredictum.com

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

CNN's Barbara Starr is reporting that a court has ordered the Pentagon to release Pentagon surveillance video from 9/11 that shows AA flight #77 hitting the building. Judicial Watch has pursued this video in the courts for several years.

Barbara Starr expects that this video will answer some questions and suspicions that have circulated (largely on the internet) since 9/11. This video release on includes the Pentagon 's surveillance cameras. It does not include other surveillance video that were confiscated from local business after the 9/11 attack.

UPDATE: Judicial Watch plans to post the video on their site sometime after they receive it at 1 pm ET today. Their site is getting hit pretty hard right now. If we can obtain a copy of the video we will re-post it here.

UPDATE #2: MSNBC's Pete Williams is reporting that the newly released video is a series of frames that are similar to some previously released video frames showing a fireball exploding on a exterior wall of the Pentagon. The new video frames show the same fireball exploding from a different angle. It supposedly only shows "the tip of the plane which may not be enough to satisfy the conspiracy theorist," says Williams.

UPDATE #3: CNN is now showing the new video frames. They look very similar to the previously seen "pentagon fireball" video frames. If you weren't convinced by that earlier set of video frames then you will probably not be impressed by this newly released set of video frames. The new video is reported to be a little over a minute long and may have views from several different (but similar) angles. We're trying to get a copy from Judicial Watch for closer inspection...

UPDATE #4 (This one from Brad): I just spoke with Christopher Farrell, director of Investigations and Research at Judicial Watch who says their servers have crashed due to the crush of interest in the video, but that their technical guys are working on it, and they should be back up shortly.

He says this new video, "shows the plane coming in real fast and real low and the nightmare ball of fire that you'd imagine."

Farrell explained that while "some Internet sites had some other version that they posted that is different from the one we've got. This one shows a silver streak very clearly coming in, incredibly low, and slamming into the building. It wasn't like a dive-bomber from above, but coming in very low."

He says that, though it's security camera video, so it's not great, it clearly shows the plane as it crashed into the Pentagon.

Keep checking the Judicial Watch site for when they come back up. Otherwise, we've offered to host the video over here at BRAD BLOG if they continue to have bandwidth and server issues. So feel free to continue checking back here to this item as well.

UPDATE #5 - From MSNBC, here is a screenshot of the frame that reportedly shows the plane followed by a zoomed-in view of the same frame...

Guest blogged by David Edwards of Veredictum.com

Part 1: Maher's Monologue, Panel Discussion

Video in Streaming Flash format...
Video in Windows Media format...
Audio in MP3 format...
Playing Time: 10 minutes

Part 2: Panel Continued, New Rules, Maher's Closing Rant

Video in Streaming Flash format...
Video in Windows Media format...
Audio in MP3 format...
Playing Time: 12 minutes

Friday's episode of HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher was the final live broadcast of the season. The panelist were musician John Legend, national security expert Richard Clarke, and academic Cornell West.

Maher took the opportunity of the season final to focus on slamming President Bush. Maher said that Bush was such an easy target that he had avoided having a Bush theme throughout the season.

Discussion of recent stories about the NSA's domestic programs really took over much of the show. Maher's panelist were outraged at the Bush Administration's abuse of power. Cornell West was highly critical of human and civil rights abuses while Richard Clarke warned of the dangers that happen when an incompetent government employs excessive power.

Due to the length of the video, it has been split into 2 parts. Both parts contain clips from the show that focus on Maher's criticism of Bush and the NSA's domestic spying.

Apropos to the discussion of late concerning the unquestioning relationship between Voting Machine Company Officials and State Elections Officials (see our last entry with documents revealing Pennsylvania simply reformatted a Diebold notice and released it as their own), The BRAD BLOG has obtained exclusive video from a public meeting held in Mississippi last year in which Diebold representative Charles "Buck" Jones demonstrates the AccuVote TSx (touch-screen) machines to a number of people, including the Mississippi Secretary of State Eric Clark.

Clark, who clearly states that his mind is already made up as to the security of Diebold's touch-screen systems refuses to stick around to answer questions at the meeting. Incredibly, he's recorded in this video tape, made in 2005, describing the security of the Diebold's touch-screen machines as "the most secure thing outside of a Wells-Fargo truck."

Jones, "The Diebold Man", as described in the video, is the one trying to refute "reports you might have seen on the Internet" to some Election Integrity Advocates present at the meeting. He's the one who says directly to the camera: "I'm not gonna see it on the Internet or anything like that, right?"

BRAD BLOG readers may recall Jones as the one who'd contacted us via email on a Saturday last March just moments after we'd posted an article concerning an election in New Hampshire which had to be rerun after it was discovered the electronic voting machines had apparently recorded more votes than there were voters. The story Jones contacted us about covered the New Hampshire Union-Leader's report of the incident, which had errantly described the voting machine in question as one of Diebold's. Jones kindly informed us the Union Leader report was in error, and the faulty machine was, in fact, made by their competitor, ES&S.

We quipped at the time that it would be lovely if Diebold was as responsive to the myriad problems revealed in their own systems, as they apparently are in pointing out problems found in their competitor's systems.

Given the litany of recently revealed, irrefutable security problems found in Diebold electronic voting machines, this seems a good time to share this video with you. It was made by one of the attendees at the meeting...

"It is like the nuclear bomb for e-voting systems," said Avi Rubin, computer science professor at Johns Hopkins University. "It's the deal breaker. It really makes the security flaws that we found (in prior years) look trivial."
-- From Security Focus, 5/12/06

Pennsylvania officials warned local election registrars last week about the vulnerability in the mechanism that installs and upgrades software on Diebold equipment. It said the risk of the vulnerability being exploited was "low".
-- From AP, 5/11/06

The first graf above, quoting Rubin, comes from a superb and indepth article by Robert Lemos at Security Focus on the latest Diebold security disaster. We recommend his report for a host of reasons, amongst them; his broad coverage of dozens of the stories we've yelled and screamed about here at The BRAD BLOG over the past several months, but also because he adds loads of details to the latest Diebold mess which is finally being picked up by the mainstream media. Big time. (Here's an eye-popping compilation of scores of articles from just last Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, with many more to come.)

We point to Rubin's quote --- similar to on the record statements from of the other computer scientists and e-voting security professionals familiar with the details of the built-in "feature" in Diebold's touch-screen systems now revealed to be an extraordinary security vulnerability --- by way of contrast to the way both Diebold and the State of Pennsylvania (and subsequently the bulk of the media) reported their characterization of the problem. That would be the second graf of this story in which AP quotes PA officials describing the risk as "low."

From Diebold's Mouth to Your Ears...

We're often asked, by media folks and others, why it is that Election Officials seem to stand by their E-Voting Machines and Vendors, such as Diebold, ES&S and others, instead of holding them accountable and independently verifying their (usually unsupported) claims about the security and reliability of their voting machines --- as Leon County, FL Supervisor of Elections, Ion Sancho and Emery County, UT County Clerk, Bruce Funk, both rare exceptions --- did.

Setting aside that both Sancho and Funk have been fighting with state officials to hang on to their jobs ever since, The BRAD BLOG has obtained a few documents which underscore what's really at work in the bulk of Election Official/Election Machine Vendor relationships...

By John Gideon, www.VotersUnite.Org and www.VoteTrustUSA.Org May 15, 2006

Yes, the wheels are wobbling on the locomotives. The vendors --- ES&S, Diebold, and the rest --- attempt to keep a stiff upper lip as they both fail to perform, yet continue collecting tax-payer dollars from the county election coffers. Meanwhile some elections officials have just turned a blind-eye to what is happening while they continue to make excuses for their vendors: The private corporate American Electronic Voting Machine behemoths that are being paid to take over America's Public Electoral system.

And the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) which was put in place by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), theoretically, to keep all of this from occurring? Well, all they do is raise their hands and shrug and tell anyone who asks, that they don't do voting systems certification so they just don't know anything. The Sergeant Schultz Defense, perhaps?

As longtime BRAD BLOG commenter, Czaragorn asked for some red meat today, and as we've been conflicted on whether to "report" anything on this or not, we'll just toss it out there and say, oh well, Czaragorn asked for it. And we aim to please.

Surely, you've all heard the many and various rumors and speculation of late about a Karl Rove indictment being handed down from the Grandy Jury in the Valerie Plame TreasonGate case. Either that, or you've read Jason Leopold's article from Friday reporting that Rove has informed the White House he's about to be indicted. Or the follow-up story yesterday, in which he reports that it's a done deal, Rove's attorneys have been served with the indictment and that Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald has spent Friday and Saturday with Rove's attorneys in pursuit of some sort of plea deal.

While we can't independently confirm or deny any of Jason's specific reporting, we have received various bits and pieces of note from sources that we have more than a fair bit of confidence in, while at the same time noting a few other interesting signs and tea leaves worth pondering...at least for Cazaragorn's sake...

From WISH-TV...

From today's Tennessean...

As usual, btw, the reporter gets the story wrong with the same misinformation concerning the Help America Vote Act (HAVA):

As if we haven't repeated this hundreds of times here: HAVA requires one disabled-accessible voting device (not machine!) in each polling place (not precinct, though that error is one we had made previously ourselves). Larger point being that there are other devices for voting that can be used which are not "machines" --- despite how much the vendors appreciate the mainstream media doing their misinformation for them.

(In which we subtly bite the very Huff Po hand that feeds us...)

"On Electronic Voting: We Were Always Right, They Were Always Wrong..."

And we entrust these guys to correctly count our votes?! Are we out of our minds? Can these guys do anything right? (These questions have long ago been answered on these very pages, of course.)

From AP today...

And from the Daytona Beach News-Journal...

How much higher can the mountain of evidence get to make the case that these guys should be put out of the election business and our democracy's misery immediately and entirely?

Who the hell is running the federal Elections Assistance Commission (EAC)? OJ's jury?!

...CONTACT...
United States Election Assistance Commission
1225 New York Avenue N.W., Suite - 1100
Washington, DC 20005

Telephone: (202) 566-3100
Toll Free: (866) 747-1471
Fax: (202) 566-3127
E-mail Address: HAVAinfo@eac.gov

I was in studio today with Marc Maron of Air America. First time on his show. A good guy (who got screwed by Air America, btw, when they dumped him from their national morning show.)

I thought I'd take the opportunity, while on Air America's air, to beat up a li'l on Air America, and Al Franken specifically, for not touching any of this Election Reform stuff.

That, Ann Coulter, and a few other rants in a very fast paced 12-minute appearance which I think you'll enjoy...

-- Brad on The Marc Maron Show [MP3]

Guest blogged by David Edwards of Veredictum.com

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

Jonathan Turley is a Law Professor at George Washington University. He is an expert on Constitutional Law and legal ethics. He also specializes in legal services for defendants in cases involving classified material. Turley appeared as guest on MSNBC's Countdown to help explain the legal issues with the NSA's ongoing collection of "billions of phone calls" of "tens of millions of Americans."

The Communications Act of 1934 states that phone companies can not give out information on its' customers calling habits. Examining the possible legality of the NSA program, Jonathan Turley says, "If what was reported in USA TODAY is true... it seems to me, once again to violate Federal Law." Turley concludes, "I've spent a day now looking for the possible authority that they would use for this operation and I've come up with nothing."

BONUS VIDEO - Turley: Bush Prefers to Promote Inner-Circle of Criminals

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

The night before USA TODAY broke the NSA Call Database story, Jonathan Turley made another appearance on MSNBC's Countdown. In this interview, Turley uses the nomination of General Hayden as CIA Director to point out a pattern in the types of activities and people that President Bush prefers to promote.

Turley notes the large number of people in Bush's inner-circle that have been accused of criminals activities, a lack of legal ethics and even indicted/convicted crimnals. General Hayden's creation and subsequent defense of NSA programs that violate civil rights and FISA laws is the latest visible example in this pattern.

Jonathan Turley makes a serious comparison between the HBO's fictional crime family and the Bush's inner-circle. There is an obvious comparison between the loyalty and obedience required to be "made" in the Soprano family and the people allowed in Bush's bubble. Turley also wonders if criminal activity benefiting the Bush's goals is an attribute that accelerates a person's initiation into the "Bush Crime Family".

An article in the conservative Wall Street Journal tomorrow covers a number of E-voting meltdown/train wreck issues around the country, including the nine lawsuits currently in progress around the country to push back these damned, untested, unsecure, hackable machines and other points of which The BRAD BLOG has been reporting over the last many many months.

We're glad to see them finally take notice and report on these problems to the nation.

The niceties now set aside, the article minimizes the myriad severe problems and security issues throughout. One way of doing that, is referring to these problems as "glitches" no less than five times by our count. Another way of doing that, is quoting Election Integrity attorney Lowell Finley of VoterAction.org in half a sentence. And devoting the rest of the quotes in the piece to spokespersons from Diebold (known liar, David Bear) and ES&S, along with unsecure electronic voting proponent (and cowardly disinformation expert), AZ Sec. of State, Jan Brewer.

None of the many Election Integrity advocates, computer science or security professionals, apparently, were allowed to refute the silly apologists disinformation statements of Brewer, Bear or Ken Fields of ES&S.

Still, one passage from late in the article is just flat wrong:

Sounds a whole lot like David Bear talking there. The fact is, the so-called "Hursti Hack" in Leon County, Florida in December, 2005, covered in some detail by the mainstream media, confirmed by CA SoS and Diebold proponent Bruce McPherson's own independent analysis [PDF], proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that both a hacker and an insider could electronically manipulate the vote.

We're happy to see the national coverage. It would be nice if they could avoid such statements that are demonstrably wrong and misleading.

National media may feel free to contact us. We'll be happy to help you avoid such easily avoidable errors and will put you in touch with all manner of experts who can help you understand what's really going on here.

Guest Blogged by John Gideon

As was expected the corporate media picked-up the latest in Diebold's sordid story --- which we reported first here last Friday --- with articles by Ian Hoffman yesterday and today and even the Associated Press stepped in as well.

Unfortunately the headline of Hoffman's article yesterday characterized the security hole as being a 'glitch'; which this certainly is not. It is also not a 'flaw' as it was characterized by today's Hoffman and AP articles. (Ed note: Hoffman has been very good at reporting on all of these related stories, so we don't wish to be overly critical of him, but rather point out the inaccurate characterization.)

This is a 'feature' that was knowingly installed by Diebold. It was not a mistake or something that was overlooked in the design of the software. It is not a 'bug', 'glitch', 'flaw', 'error in programming' or any other simplistic name. Michael Shamos, a Carnegie Mellon University computer science professor and veteran voting-systems examiner for the state of Pennsylvania has said this:

Johns Hopkins University computer science professor Avi Rubin, who published the first security analysis of Diebold voting software in 2003 had this to say:

In the meantime the state of Georgia has decided that there is nothing that they have to do because their administrative rules already mitigate the problem. Of course, they made that statement without knowing what the full problem is.

A redacted copy of the Hursti "Critical Security Alert: Diebold TSx and TS6 voting systems" can be found at BlackBoxVoting.Org. Bev Harris guarantees that the redaction only resulted in 50 words being removed from this copy of the report.

Finally, I would be remiss in not pointing to this final line of Dan Goodin's article for AP:

Uh, Dan, you could have had a more timely article, and probably scooped Ian Hoffman if you had read The BRAD BLOG on Friday, where you would have found the whole story posted exclusively that day.

It's about time that the corporate media begin looking to the blogs as a source instead of ignoring us like we aren't here. Or at least admitting that they're looking to the blogs as a source, instead of only attributing those in the MSM.

Will Dan Goodin or the AP post a clarification to their story? We're not holding our breath.