Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am
making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided
for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am
making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided
for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission
from the copyright owner.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
Campaign for Justice
Please tell a friend to go to
WhereToVote.com
WhereToVote.com
NEW HAMPSHIRE ELECTION INTEGRITY ADVOCATE NANCY TOBI IS CORRECT:
By turt3l | January 11, 2008
“We have no control over the ballot chain of custody and we have
learned the pain from the 2004 Nader recount, in which only 11
districts were counted, chosen by a highly questionable person,
and then nothing showed up. Now all we hear is how the Nader
recount validated the machines.” As Tobi says, “A candidate
asking for a recount may well be a tool used to ‘prove’ everything
was okay and then that candidate will be further discredited.” I’ll go
further than that. The only way a recount makes any sense at all in
New Hampshire is AFTER an assessment is made of the chain of
custody issues. If the chain of custody isn’t intact the recount won’
t be worth a cup of warm spit. >TOBI: ”This is high stakes. ”You
do not walk into a battle ground not knowing where the snipers
are, just because you were invited. Strategically, going into
something like this where you have NO CONTROL is foolishness. ”
And I say this as one of the strongest recount proponents of
former times. Things I have come to learn and understand have
changed my mind. The recount is someone else’s game, not ours. ”
In the recount, we have no control, and we have already lost 48
long hours of ballot chain of custody oversight. ”We need citizen
control and oversight. This is not going to come from the recount.
If the election was rigged…don’t you think the riggers would have
a backup Plan B for a rigged recount, knowing how easy it is to get
a recount in NH? No. It is time to take control. “
WHAT’S THE POINT OF A RECOUNT IF THE CANDIDATE DOESN’T
EVEN KNOW… 1) The name of all companies that print ballots for
New Hampshire elections. 2) The ballot ordering history for each
location, especially those using computerized voting systems and
the inventory records for the current contest. 3) The ballot chain of
custody plan for each location and for the state of New Hampshire.
IMMEDIATE CONCERNS - We don’t have information on ballot
inventory records. - With ballots and recounts, it’s all about
blocking ballot substitution. To achieve substitution, you need
extra ballots. If you get more ballots, someone might follow the
money trail and ask you why you’re sitting on 10,000 or so blank
ballots. So you need some workarounds.
BALLOT CHAIN OF CUSTODY WAR STORIES Patriot Richard
Hayes Phillips, while writing his brilliant upcoming book “Witness
to a Crime,” uncovered evidence that an Ohio County took delivery
on 10,000 off-the-books ballots in 2004. Employees for the Diebold
ballot printing plant slipped us financials showing that Diebold was
printing 25% more ballots than ordered. This could be handy: If a
governmental entity doesn’t take official delivery on ballots, Plan B
can sit at a print house somewhere, on private property and absent
from either government bookkeeping or public records.
CONVICTED FELONS The Diebold ballot printing plant at the time
we got records on the overages, was being run by a convicted
felon who had spent four years in prison on a narcotics trafficking
charge. No, not New Hampshire’s voting machine programming
exec Ken Hajjar, who cut a plea deal in 1990 for his role in cocaine
distribution. This was another convicted felon, John Elder, who ran
the Diebold ballot printing plant; he’s now an elections consultant.
We have so far been unable to learn whether New Hampshire has
convicted felons printing their ballots; we’ve got a records request
in on this. New Hampshire officials like to say “The state prints the
ballots” but they sure aren’t printed in Secretary of State Bill
Gardner’s office. Frank S., one of the new breed of citizens
jumping in to take back control of our elections, took the initiative
on his own to help today by spending several hours trying to find
the ballot printer in NH. It may be that convicted felons print the
ballots: Frank turned up evidence that one state-paid printing
vendor is NHCI - New Hampshire Correctional Industries, a prison-
based printing outfit. New Hampshire Correctional Industries is a
job training program for inmates. After they get out of prison they
have a skill! I’m not sure we want a bunch of ex-convicts running
around in New Hampshire with ballot printing expertise, so I hope a
different ballot printing vendor will show up. Any candidate seeking
a recount needs to know this stuff.
IDENTIFY NARROW SPOTS IN THE PIPELINE What is the smallest
number of people with access, and at what points does
centralization of access occur?
WHERE HAVE THE BALLOTS BEEN DURING THE LAST 48 HOURS
If there’s going to be a recount of this magnitude, we need to know
whether checks and balances have been followed. Let me give you
an example of what I mean: In San Mateo County, California, citizen
Brent Turner asked for ballot chain of custody records for 2007; a
six-week gap in the access logs was revealed in the documents.
SHOULD CANDIDATES RECOUNT NEW HAMPSHIRE? In concept I
love the idea, but as it currently stands, it makes me queasy. They’
re walking into this blind about the details that make or break the
integrity of the process.
WHAT TO DO INSTEAD Tobi calls for doing a real investigation in
order to take corrective action by November. I’m not sure about
that. New Hampshire had hearings on the hackable Diebold optical
scan machines, and didn’t take any action to mitigate the risks.
New Hampshire knew it was running elections on machines that
can’t be trusted. And today, thanks to the efforts of two more
citizen volunteers, I learned that the New Hampshire Secretary of
State knew about the narcotics trafficking conviction of Ken Hajjar,
yet still authorized LHS to code every memory card in New
Hampshire. Harri Hursti himself testified in New Hampshire in Sept.
2007, urging them to disconnect the wiring allowing reprogramming
of the memory card through the modem port. New Hampshire took
no action. New Hampshire didn’t take even the half-step actions
other states used to beef up voting machine security. Maybe there
are better ways to skin this cat.
THE IDEA OF A RECOUNT STILL INTRIGUES ME BUT… At this
moment I can’t think of a way to offset the chain of custody
unknowns. The last thing we want is a recount that doesn’t answer
our questions, or raises new suspicions that aren’t answered.
There must be a way. It’s been a long day. Let me think on that.
Turt3l AddditionThis is the crucial issue we all face, unless we
either call for a revote, the elections process is already rigged, we
are dealing with hardened criminals that have been planning
recounts for a long time. I think we need to organize a nationwide
boycott of diebold vote casting accross the board so that we deter
people from using the machines all together. I have tried to find
info on the procedure for revoting but it is very hard to find
concise election law regarding how to call for a revote, but even if
we do that we cant revote on the electronic machines , it must be
paper ballot hand count, with strict grassroots voter oversight and
video documentation of it all.
By turt3l | January 11, 2008
“We have no control over the ballot chain of custody and we have
learned the pain from the 2004 Nader recount, in which only 11
districts were counted, chosen by a highly questionable person,
and then nothing showed up. Now all we hear is how the Nader
recount validated the machines.” As Tobi says, “A candidate
asking for a recount may well be a tool used to ‘prove’ everything
was okay and then that candidate will be further discredited.” I’ll go
further than that. The only way a recount makes any sense at all in
New Hampshire is AFTER an assessment is made of the chain of
custody issues. If the chain of custody isn’t intact the recount won’
t be worth a cup of warm spit. >TOBI: ”This is high stakes. ”You
do not walk into a battle ground not knowing where the snipers
are, just because you were invited. Strategically, going into
something like this where you have NO CONTROL is foolishness. ”
And I say this as one of the strongest recount proponents of
former times. Things I have come to learn and understand have
changed my mind. The recount is someone else’s game, not ours. ”
In the recount, we have no control, and we have already lost 48
long hours of ballot chain of custody oversight. ”We need citizen
control and oversight. This is not going to come from the recount.
If the election was rigged…don’t you think the riggers would have
a backup Plan B for a rigged recount, knowing how easy it is to get
a recount in NH? No. It is time to take control. “
WHAT’S THE POINT OF A RECOUNT IF THE CANDIDATE DOESN’T
EVEN KNOW… 1) The name of all companies that print ballots for
New Hampshire elections. 2) The ballot ordering history for each
location, especially those using computerized voting systems and
the inventory records for the current contest. 3) The ballot chain of
custody plan for each location and for the state of New Hampshire.
IMMEDIATE CONCERNS - We don’t have information on ballot
inventory records. - With ballots and recounts, it’s all about
blocking ballot substitution. To achieve substitution, you need
extra ballots. If you get more ballots, someone might follow the
money trail and ask you why you’re sitting on 10,000 or so blank
ballots. So you need some workarounds.
BALLOT CHAIN OF CUSTODY WAR STORIES Patriot Richard
Hayes Phillips, while writing his brilliant upcoming book “Witness
to a Crime,” uncovered evidence that an Ohio County took delivery
on 10,000 off-the-books ballots in 2004. Employees for the Diebold
ballot printing plant slipped us financials showing that Diebold was
printing 25% more ballots than ordered. This could be handy: If a
governmental entity doesn’t take official delivery on ballots, Plan B
can sit at a print house somewhere, on private property and absent
from either government bookkeeping or public records.
CONVICTED FELONS The Diebold ballot printing plant at the time
we got records on the overages, was being run by a convicted
felon who had spent four years in prison on a narcotics trafficking
charge. No, not New Hampshire’s voting machine programming
exec Ken Hajjar, who cut a plea deal in 1990 for his role in cocaine
distribution. This was another convicted felon, John Elder, who ran
the Diebold ballot printing plant; he’s now an elections consultant.
We have so far been unable to learn whether New Hampshire has
convicted felons printing their ballots; we’ve got a records request
in on this. New Hampshire officials like to say “The state prints the
ballots” but they sure aren’t printed in Secretary of State Bill
Gardner’s office. Frank S., one of the new breed of citizens
jumping in to take back control of our elections, took the initiative
on his own to help today by spending several hours trying to find
the ballot printer in NH. It may be that convicted felons print the
ballots: Frank turned up evidence that one state-paid printing
vendor is NHCI - New Hampshire Correctional Industries, a prison-
based printing outfit. New Hampshire Correctional Industries is a
job training program for inmates. After they get out of prison they
have a skill! I’m not sure we want a bunch of ex-convicts running
around in New Hampshire with ballot printing expertise, so I hope a
different ballot printing vendor will show up. Any candidate seeking
a recount needs to know this stuff.
IDENTIFY NARROW SPOTS IN THE PIPELINE What is the smallest
number of people with access, and at what points does
centralization of access occur?
WHERE HAVE THE BALLOTS BEEN DURING THE LAST 48 HOURS
If there’s going to be a recount of this magnitude, we need to know
whether checks and balances have been followed. Let me give you
an example of what I mean: In San Mateo County, California, citizen
Brent Turner asked for ballot chain of custody records for 2007; a
six-week gap in the access logs was revealed in the documents.
SHOULD CANDIDATES RECOUNT NEW HAMPSHIRE? In concept I
love the idea, but as it currently stands, it makes me queasy. They’
re walking into this blind about the details that make or break the
integrity of the process.
WHAT TO DO INSTEAD Tobi calls for doing a real investigation in
order to take corrective action by November. I’m not sure about
that. New Hampshire had hearings on the hackable Diebold optical
scan machines, and didn’t take any action to mitigate the risks.
New Hampshire knew it was running elections on machines that
can’t be trusted. And today, thanks to the efforts of two more
citizen volunteers, I learned that the New Hampshire Secretary of
State knew about the narcotics trafficking conviction of Ken Hajjar,
yet still authorized LHS to code every memory card in New
Hampshire. Harri Hursti himself testified in New Hampshire in Sept.
2007, urging them to disconnect the wiring allowing reprogramming
of the memory card through the modem port. New Hampshire took
no action. New Hampshire didn’t take even the half-step actions
other states used to beef up voting machine security. Maybe there
are better ways to skin this cat.
THE IDEA OF A RECOUNT STILL INTRIGUES ME BUT… At this
moment I can’t think of a way to offset the chain of custody
unknowns. The last thing we want is a recount that doesn’t answer
our questions, or raises new suspicions that aren’t answered.
There must be a way. It’s been a long day. Let me think on that.
Turt3l AddditionThis is the crucial issue we all face, unless we
either call for a revote, the elections process is already rigged, we
are dealing with hardened criminals that have been planning
recounts for a long time. I think we need to organize a nationwide
boycott of diebold vote casting accross the board so that we deter
people from using the machines all together. I have tried to find
info on the procedure for revoting but it is very hard to find
concise election law regarding how to call for a revote, but even if
we do that we cant revote on the electronic machines , it must be
paper ballot hand count, with strict grassroots voter oversight and
video documentation of it all.
| Christopher Young (Democrat) Candidate for The United States Senate |