No Stolen Democracy

Press Briefing on Challenge to Ohio Electoral Votes

(via dzika, Democratic Underground.)

Real Media
http://www.edwardsdavid.com/BushVideos/blackcaucus_0501...

Reps. Jackson and Lewis speak out during Ohio Vote Challenge

(via dzika, Democratic Underground.)

Real Media
http://www.edwardsdavid.com/BushVideos/jacksonjr_050106...

Dennis Kucinich speaks out during Ohio vote challenge

(via dzika, Democratic Underground.)

http://www.edwardsdavid.com/BushVideos/kucinich_050106-...

Press Conference Video Clip - Rep. Tubbs Jones and Sen. Boxer will contest Ohio Electoral Votes

(via dzika, Democratic Underground.)

Real Media:
http://www.edwardsdavid.com/BushVideos/Boxer_050106-01....

Jesse Jackson, Jr.'s Floor Statement During Challenge to Ohio's Electoral College Votes

January, 6, 2005

Don't be confused or misled. Today's objection is not about an election result, it's about an election system that's broken and needs fixing.

Today you're hearing the facts about voter irregularities in Ohio. In 2000 you saw a similar mess in Florida. There were serious voting problems in other states - for example, New Mexico, Nevada and Florida again.

As we try to spread democracy to Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, it might be wise, first, to look in the mirror; to take a serious look at our own house; and to analyze our own democracy.

What's wrong with our democracy? What's wrong with our voting system? State-after-state, year-after-year, why do we keep on having these problems?

The fundamental reason is this: most Americans and many in this body will find it shocking and hard to believe, but we have these problems because Americans don't have the right to vote in their Constitution! In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore said in very plain language, "the INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States." You say, "Congressman, I'm a registered voter and every time there's an election I'm entitled to vote - and I vote. What do you mean I don't have a 'right to vote'?"

I mean as an American you don't have a citizenship right to vote. Voting in the United States is a "state right" not "citizenship right."

We keep on having these problems because our voting system is built on the constitutional foundation of "states' rights" - 50 states, 3,067 counties and 13,000 different election jurisdictions, ALL SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL.

If you're an ex-felon in Illinois you can register and vote. If you're an ex-felon in eleven states, mostly in the South, you're barred from voting for life. There are nearly 5 million ex-felons who have paid their debt to society but are prohibited from ever voting again - including 1.5 million African American males. But in Maine and Vermont you can vote even if you're in jail. Like I said, we have a "states rights" separate and unequal voting system.

You ask, "What's the difference between a citizenship right and a state right?"

The First Amendment contains individual citizenship rights that go with you from state to state (that is, they are the same wherever you are in the U.S.); and they are protected and enforced by the federal government. You have equal protection under the law by the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the federal government.

Therefore, as a result of the First Amendment, every American citizen has an individual right to free speech, freedom of assembly, and religious freedom (or to choose no religion at all), regardless of which state you're in - individual rights that are protected by the federal government. You don't have such a right when it comes to voting!

A state right is NOT an American citizenship right, but a right defined and protected by each state - and limited to that state. Therefore, when it comes to voting, each state, county and election jurisdiction is different.

One-hundred-and-eight of the 119 nations in the world that elect their public officials in some democratic manner have the right to vote in their Constitution - including the Afghan Constitution and the interim document in Iraq. The United States is one of the 11 that don't!

The Bible says if you build a house on sand, when it rains, the winds blow and the storms come it will not stand. Our voting system is built on the sand of "states' rights."

That's why every four years when the entire nation is focused on a presidential election, and the rain of politics, the winds of partisanship, and the storms of campaigning come, our democratic house cannot stand the unitary test of voting fairness - and it has come close to collapsing in 2000 and 2004.

The American people are gradually losing confidence in the credibility, fairness, effectiveness and efficiency of our voting system. We cannot export our current voting system or our form of democracy to other nations because our "separate and unequal" voting system, and our concept of an Electoral College, do not reflect the best of a representative democracy. We need to build our democracy and our voting system on a rock, the rock of adding a Voting Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that applies to all states and all citizens.

We need to provide the American people with a citizenship right to vote and provide Congress with the authority to craft a unitary voting system that is inclusive of all Americans and guarantees that all votes will be counted in a complete, fair and efficient manner.

It's the only foundation upon which we can build a more perfect Union.

Every two, four or six years every member of Congress wants the people in their district or state to stand up and vote for them. Today it's time for every member of Congress to stand up and vote for the right of the people to vote, and to have their vote fairly and fully counted.

A Letter From One of the Coalition Against Election Fraud DC Lobbyists

Dear Senator,

One Honest Man. In ancient Greece, the philosopher Diogenes went searching with a lantern to find "one honest man". It wasn't easy. I don't know if he ever succeeded. (I suspect that if he broadened his search to include women, he might have succeeded!)

For the last three days my colleagues and I from a modest group of citizens have been searching the halls of the senate office buildings for "One Courageous Senator". We carry notebooks of evidence instead of lanterns. We don't know if we will succeed.

The senators, and representatives, have a legal duty today to pass judgment on the electoral behavior of every one of the 50 states. Although there have been a few exceptions, tradition is that they accept the votes sent to them. They go through the formalities of accepting the votes, but they have the opportunity to object.

They have an opportunity to say, state-by-state, that the selection of electors was done in an acceptable way, or to say that it was not acceptable. To the extent that it is possible for independent investigators to know in the short period since the election, we know that what went on in at least several states cannot be acceptable, and we have clues that even worse things went on. These are clues that must be followed.

There are thousands of people whose names can be named and whose stories are documented who suffered attempts, successful or unsuccessful, at disenfranchisement. This is acceptable?

There are states that don't follow or even thwart their own rules for recounts, including documented cases of tampering of machines before recounts. This is acceptable?

There are documented attempts to fabricate election materials obtained under freedom of information requests, and to destroy the real material. This is acceptable?

And we have clues, many of them, that the basic process of collecting and tabulating votes may have been tampered with in favor of one candidate. These are not honest errors; they are tips of icebergs -- icebergs that we will discover either by investigation, or when our democracy hits them, and sinks.

In a few hours the House and Senate will be asked, "Is this acceptable?" Yes or no, Senator, is this acceptable?

We're looking for "One Courageous Senator" who will stand up and say, "This is wrong!" We wish we could find 100. The American people, and the generations who went before, deserve 100 courageous senators. But can we find even one?

In our conversations with Senator's aides, we see little outrage at this unacceptable electoral behavior. More seriously, we don't see any courage. It is not courageous to simply defer all questions to a future GAO report. Is the GAO the "Department of Courage"? It is not courageous to say, "we have laws and agencies to deal with that" or "the states will deal with that", especially when the questions include the behavior of state government.

And then there's the excuse of "unity". I find it incredible that any of our most powerful and respected leaders would consider a vague "unity" a more important principle than voting rights, justice, and democracy. In a democracy, "unity" without voting rights is worthless. Why would any honorable person want to claim "unity" with people who suppressed certain classes of voters? And why would anyone with a basic knowledge of history think democracy requires unity? Unity is a characteristic of dictatorships!

Washington, DC should be a grand and beautiful city. But "beauty is as beauty does". Right now Washington is a very ugly city. People have lost the right to vote, and to have that vote counted honestly, by deliberate actions; however, few want to talk about it.

A bright light has been shown on our electoral process thanks to the efforts of election observers from many organizations. Is there not even one senator who can stand up to say, about any or all of the tens of thousands of problems, "This is wrong"? Or will each senator wait for someone else, or a safer time, to say that?

Bob Fleischer
Coalition Against Election Fraud (CAEF)
http://www.caef.us
Massachusetts
United States of America

Rivers Pitt Interview With John Conyers

Interview: Rep. Conyers with Will Pitt
  t r u t h o u t | Interview

  Thursday 06 January 2005

  I was able to interview Rep. John Conyers, ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, just before the Electoral hearings began.

  PITT: How are you feeling about what is happening today?

  CONYERS: We have come a mighty long way. It seems to me, as we began this adventure, to make the ballot as important as it is, and that it be counted, and that it be available to every single qualified American voter, that I had always suspected that it would be hard for the United States Senate to do, again, what they did in 2000. To close down any possibility of any debate, of any investigation, of any recount, and it turns out that my hunch was correct.

  The fact of the matter is that we have everything to gain and nothing to lose by doing this. This isn't like there is a down-side to this. It is all up, because as everybody knows, all the phones are jammed, emails are coming in, faxes. People are coming in from all over. This is a test of American democracy, just as in 1878. They passed the law to deal with the presidential election of 1877. We have to, in 2005, pass some more election reform laws to deal with what happened in 2004.

  Senator Boxer, in her press conference with Rep. Tubbs-Jones today, said that she regretted not having stood up in 2000. What do you think about that?

  I'm sure that a lot of people have done some reconsideration of their silence from four years ago. It was totally uncalled for, but it was asked for by the then-candidate, Al Gore, and they went along.

  A little while ago, there were some Republican Representatives denigrating the whole process, describing this as an attempt to overthrow the election. How do you respond to that? What do you see as being the main purpose of this event today?

  Anyone opposed to us re-examining the balloting process in the state that had the most complaints and grievances and errors of any other state, they've got to have some kind of reason. This is not to change the outcome of the results. But I hasten to add that until we complete our investigation, I don't know if it will change the result or if it won't change the result.

  But that's not what I'm after. What I'm after is understanding what things were not done properly, what things were done fraudulently, what things were done unintentionally, so that we can correct it. There is an election coming up again. We thought we had taken care of this with the Help America Vote Act. It turns out that, in many instances, the provisions of the Act were misconstructed and not really followed, particularly on provisional voting ballots. Many people who voted provisionally were disqualified for reasons that are directly in conflict with the intentions of those of us who put that into law.

  So where does this go from here?

  We, here, are asking today to have a joint House/Senate committee reconsider and review all of the investigatory work that me and the members and our staff have brought together. We want to get a commitment that we are going to come out of this looking for additional election law reforms, because there are a lot of people who don't want to do that. This brings it all into focus. It tests the will of every member in the Senate and the House as to what they stand for in these elections.

  Is there anything else you'd like to add?

  I think what the American people did and are doing, in calling and letting everybody know that they are outraged, that this has to be something that somebody would study to determine whether they want to object to the Electoral College report from Ohio, has been extraordinary, and has had a huge impact. Of course, the one person not in any government position, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, deserves tremendous praise for all he has done in coordinating so many efforts here, including right up until today.

  I think a lot of people would agree that your opening of the hearing in the beginning of December, and then later in Ohio, gave people an opportunity not only to hear the evidence and grievances, but also gave people the chance to begin moving towards doing something about it. So I think a lot of people owe you a debt of gratitude, as well.

  That's very kind of you.

New York Times Coverage

Congress Ratifies Bush Victory After a Rare Challenge.

The New York Times has a decent article on today's events. The quotations are skewed in favor of the Republicans and the sell out Democats, but the coverage is substantive.Why it wasn't front page news is hard to fathom.

January 6, 2005 -- Washington, DC, In front of FBI Headquarters -- 9:00 A.M. -- Rally & Vigil Calling for Investigation

IMPORTANT! (see note below)

  RALLY AND VIGIL TO BE HELD AT FBI HEADQUARTERS
IN WASHINGTON, DC, 9 AM, JAN. 6TH                                                         

We would appreciate it if you would spread the word as widely as possible that, prior to the 10 AM rally at Lafayette Park, a rally and vigil will be held Thursday, Nov. 6 at 9 AM at the headquarters of the FBI, 935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, at Pennsylvania Avenue entrance, calling for an intensive investigation of vote rigging and vote suppression in Ohio,Florida and other states.

The rally is being organized by people from White Plains, NY, who have held nine rallies and vigils since Dec. 3 at the White Plains office of the FBI. So far they have received no response to letters they have sent to the FBI.

We will march from this vigil to the 10 AM rally at Lafayette Park.

For information, contact Nick Mottern (914) 806-6179.

 

(Via Ohio Election Fraud)      

This particular protest is the other front of our struggle to protect voting rights. For a primer on what is at stake, please read Jefferey Toobin's Poll Position. Also see this and this at my other blog. --BG

Press Conference Tomorrow -- Wednesday, Jan. 5th -- 2:00 P.M. -- National Press Club, Washington, D.C.

Ilene PRoctor
International Public Relations
Press Contact:
Ilene Proctor (310) 271 5857 or (310) 721-2336
Kat L’Estrange (541) 510-5646

BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT, BUSH DID NOT WIN THE OHIO OR NATIONAL VOTE.
HISTORIC PRESIDENTIAL CHALLENGE.
PRESS CONFERENCE, NATIONAL PRESS CLUB, WASHINGTON, D.C.
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5TH AT 2:00 PM

WHO:
Lead plaintiff, Moss v. Bush, Rev. Bill Moss
Lead trial counsel, Peter Peckarsky
Professor and statistical expert, Ron Baiman, Ph.D.
Publisher and lawyer, Bob Fitrakis
Lawyer, Susan Truitt
Exit polling expert, Jonathan Simon, JD
Senior editor, freepress.org. Harvey Wasserman
Legal statistician, Richard Hayes-Phillips, Ph.D
Director, Progressive Democrats of America, Tim Carpenter
NAACP, National Voter Fund, Greg Moore
Author Warren Linney, MA (The Patriot Test)

WHAT:  
• Exit polls did not match the reported vote in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and 7 of 8 other  key battleground states
• Voting machines with secret software owned by private, partisan companies subject to  manipulation and which deprived citizens of their right to fair and transparent elections
• Uncounted and provisional ballots negatively and disproportionately affected African American voters 
• Inexplicable vote disparities
• Voting Rights Act Violations
• Recount did not recount all the votes
• Challenge at January 6 Joint Session of Congress

WHY: 
TO PROVIDE FULL BACKGROUND ON KEY ASSERTIONS PRIOR TO THE HISTORIC CONGRESSIONAL CHALLENGE TO THE 2004 VOTE

PARTIAL LIST OF EVIDENCE:
There is clear and compelling evidence that the election was stolen. By examining a very wide range of sworn testimonies from voters, polling officials and others close to the administration of the Nov. 2 election; by statistical analysis of the certified vote by mathematicians, election experts and independent research teams who have conducted detailed studies of the results in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and elsewhere; from experts who studied the voting machines, tabulators and other electronic equipment on which a fair vote count has depended; and from a team of attorneys and others who have challenged the Ohio results; the freepress.org investigative team has compiled a portrait  of an election whose true outcome must be investigated further by the Congress, the media and all Americans -- because it was almost certainly not an honest victory for George W. Bush.

Crucial flaws in the national vote count, most importantly in the national popular vote, and in Ohio and Florida indicate John Kerry was the actual winner on November 2, as reported in national exit polls. At the very least, the widespread tampering with how the election was conducted, and how Ohio's votes were counted and re-counted, has compromised this nation's historic commitment to free and fair elections.

George W. Bush's ‘victory' appears to have resulted from multiple frauds – a GOP ‘do-whatever it takes'  strategy to win the state that swung the election.

The questionable votes far exceed Bush's margin of victory in Ohio.

The Bush-Cheney ‘do what ever it takes" strategy in Ohio covered a very wide range of tactics, from disenfranchisement of minority voters to discarding of ballots to tampered tabulators and much more. Taken as a whole, this compendium of error, fraud, cover-up and contempt indicates that this was not a legitimate election, and is not worthy of being certified by the Congress of the United States.

Thirty disenfranchised voters on the Freedom Winter bus ride from Columbus, Ohio to Washington, D.C. will be present to share their voting horror stories with the media.

WHERE:
National Press Club
Zenger Room
529 14th St. NW, 13th Floor
Washington, DC 20045
202.662.7500

SPONSORED BY: Free Press, _www.freepress.org_ (http://www.freepress.org/) Citizens Alliance for Secure Elections, _www.caseohio.org_ (http://www.caseohio.org/) Progressive Democrats of America, _www.pdamerica.org_ (http://www.pdamerica.org/) We Do Not Concede _www.donotconcede.com_ (http://www.donotconcede.com/)
 

(via Ohio Election Fraud)