Bob Fitrakis, plaintiff in the 2012 Ohio electronic election fraud case, Fitrakis v. Husted, hosts Fight Back on TalktainmentRadio.com and invited me to discuss electronic vote count rigging with him last Wednesday. We discuss Andy Kreig's important article in OpEd News, ABC's Scandal's presentation of election rigging from an inside perspective, and the potential for this case to bring down the whole pattern of corrupt activity, if we are able to raise sufficient funds from the public interest community. Here is the web link to last Wednesday's show: http://talktainmentradio.com/podcasts/013013%20Fight%20Back.mp3- Cliff Arnebeck Please help with either a tax-deductible contribution to the CICJ - Election Protection Action Education and Defense Fund or make an anonymous donation to Election Protection Action, Inc. with your choice of one of the "Donate" buttons @ http://www.electionprotectionaction.org/index.html Thanks!
[ Reposted with permission from The Washington Spectator.] by Lou Dubose For 30 years, Karl Rove has won elections by a formula that depended on deceit and defamation. A whispering campaign that described Texas Governor Ann Richards as a closet lesbian; an announcement that two aides working for Texas Agriculture Commissioner Jim Hightower would be indicted (before Justice Department lawyers made any announcement about indictments); rumors of John McCain’s illegitimate black child that circulated in South Carolina after McCain defeated George W. Bush in the 2000 New Hampshire primary; rumors about Cindy McCain’s drug habit; a national media campaign that turned John Kerry’s service in Vietnam into a liability. Later in his career, Rove’s connections with Republican state officials overseeing elections, and the big private corporations contracted to conduct them, have put him in position to manipulate the vote when he couldn’t deliver it. For the elected officials targeted by Rove, and for those of us who have documented his work, the word schadenfreude will forever be associated with Fox News’s 2012 election night coverage.
So, two judges deny temporary restraining order (TRO) requests against using the secretly patched experimental software recently put in place in systems to be used in vote counting across tens of Ohio counties. The software patched systems are being used after legal efforts to remedy the potential threat were denied in both Federal and state jurisdictions. But, according to FreePress.org, Judge Sherrott's Common Pleas decision left open options for what may happen in post-election continuation of the case in the event evidence for related tampering emerges.
Plaintiff Fitrakis takes issue to State CourtVIa pdf update posted to Moritz Law, at 2:05 PM, the decision of Judge Gregory L. Frost (Case No. 2:12-cv-1015): This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Robert Fitrakis’s motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”). (ECF No. 3.) Specifically, Fitrakis seeks an injunction prohibiting Defendant Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted (“Secretary”) from using certain software provided by Defendant Election Systems & Software, Inc. (“ES&S”) “in order to record and tabulate votes cast by Ohio voters” in today’s election. (Id. at 1.) Defendant Secretary and Defendant ES&S each filed a memorandum in opposition to Fitrakis’s motion for a TRO. (ECF Nos. 9 and 10.) Pursuant to S. D. Local Rule 65.1, this Court convened a telephone conference with the parties’ counsel on November 5, 2012. And on November 6, 2012, the Court convened a TRO hearing at which the parties presented testimony and affidavits and presented arguments for and against the relief requested by Fitrakis. The matter is now ripe for decision by the Court. For the reasons set forth below, the Court DENIES Fitrakis’s motion for a TRO....According to FreePress.org Bob Fitrakis and attorneys have moved to state Common Pleas Court for 2:00pm hearing on same issue . [emphasis added underscoring time reference].
According to Moritz College of Law Election Law index page for Fitrakis v. Husted, the last court document update was made about an hour ago, after this morning's hearing (minutes of temporary restraining order summarized in one-page Moritz Law pdf.)
Plaintiff Bob Fitrakis, the FreePress.org editor whose organization broke the story, reported via video clip, afterwards, that testimony included expert witness from a former NSA employee Mikchael Duniho that's been briefly transcribed by FreePress.org staff, here:Donohoe also stated that it is customary, in his experience, if the Secretary of State put "experimental" software on an election system, it is usual to require hand counts in addition, in order to ensure that the added software had not affected the accuracy of the vote count, Donohoe pointed out. He also said that if a virus had been inserted through this new software, it could remain in the system. So removing the software may not remove the virus. That is why a random hand count of 5% is so important.
The closing comment goes to remedy discussed by Fitrakis in the video clip, below.
The suit filed in Federal Court was walked through late on Monday afternoon. Robert Fitrakis, the Plaintiff, immediately reported via Skype to a waiting panel of Green Party and election integrity group activists holding an Election Protection press conference at the National Press Club in anticipation of the legal filing.
In fact, a good way to track filings in this (and other related election law) case(s), is via Moritz Election Law Blog and archive: Of course, for updates related to the news and perhaps new material facts that are relevant, the Election Issues Department of the FreePress.org is pretty relevant.
by Jill Simpson and Jim March [Download PDF of this article (MOVE Act nov 5th article.pdf ~2.5 Mb).] Executive Overview The federal MOVE Act of 2009 (Military Overseas Voting Empowerment) was supposed to improve ballot access for every sort of overseas and/or military-away-from-home voter. It had the unfortunate side-effect of opening up the single worst security hole in the US election process ever seen. This is not hyperbole – the nature of the security deficit created allows a very small “attack team” (group of knowing election criminals) to alter election results across multiple jurisdictions (and even states) while acting from overseas, reducing the risk of being punished even if caught.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Clifford Arnebeck <clifford.arnebeck@...> Date: Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 5:27 PM Subject: Planned suit and request for TRO against ES&S uncertified software patch To: I have advised counsel for the OSOS and ES&S, as well as the Franklin County Common Pleas Court, of our intention to file suit to block the use of uncertified ES&S software in the 2012 election. Attached is Bob Fitrakis' affidavit in regard to the facts and opinions in his two articles on this subject in the FreePress.org this week. We will be seeking an immediate hearing once the suit has been filed, which will be not later than Monday, November 5, 2012, 9:15 AM. Cliff Cell: 614-361-9434
Investigation of the suspect procedures being used to effectively end-run Ohio's official protocols required to certify changes to electronic voting machines continues apace, at FreePress.org. The new report updates earlier reporting that the secret installations had been carried out under supposedly exceptional allowances for experimental upgrades. The Free Press confirms installation, secret justification of uncertified last minute election tabulation reporting software in Ohioby Gerry Bello and Bob FitrakisNovember 2, 2012 - http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2012/4768The Free Press has obtained internal memos from the senior staff of the Ohio Secretary of State's office confirming the installation of untested and uncertified election tabulation software. Yesterday, the Free Press reported that "experimental" software patches were installed on ES&S voting machines in 39 Ohio counties. (see Will "experimental" software patches affect the Ohio vote?).
[...]
An unelected, partisan group of attorneys appears to have conspired to install election software without testing and certification that they are professionally unqualified to pass judgment upon. These types of last minute installations of software patches on voting machines are considered suspect by knowledgeable and experienced election protection attorneys, in light of all the voting machine irregularities exposed during the 2004 election in Ohio. [Emphasis added.]
Today I discussed this development, another major 2012 election story broken by FreePress.org,, with Chris Hood, the former Diebold consultant in Georgia 2002 who exposed a patch delivered by Bob Urosevich which flipped the vote for Saxbe Chambliss from US Senator Max Cleland as well as the Governor's race, and with Jill Simpson who reported to 60 Minutes the patch used to flip the vote from Governor Don Siegelman to Bob Riley in the 2002 Alabama race. Both said this secret ES&S contract with Ohio Secretary of State Husted was reminiscent of those criminal patches. The contract was signed without public review and approval of the technology review board that must approve such contracts. This may be the primary vote flipping mechanism planned by Karl Rove to steal the essential Ohio electoral votes for his client Mitt Romney. We are reporting this to the FBI for emergency action to protect against the illegal use of this illegal patch in Ohio's 2012 elections for the Presidency and U.S. Senate. http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2012/4766Will "experimental" software patches affect the Ohio vote?by Bob Fitrakis and Gerry BelloOctober 31, 2012 - Attorney Clifford Arnebeck
|
RSS Feed