From BuzzFlash, who say they aren’t completely sure about this story yet. Neither am I.
Whistleblower Affidavit: Programmer built vote rigging prototype at Republican Congressman’s request!
The programmer claims that he designed and built a “vote rigging” software program at the behest of then Florida Congressman, now U.S. Congressman, Republican Tom Feeney of Florida’s 24th Congressional District.
At an October 2000 meeting with Feeney, according to the affidavit and BRAD BLOG interviews with Curtis over the past three days, Feeney inquired whether the company could build a “vote fraud software prototype”.
Curtis says that Feeney “was very specific in the design and specifications required for this program.”
“He detailed, in his own words, that; (a) the program needed to be touch-screen capable (b) the user should be able to trigger the program without any additional equipment (c) the programming to accomplish this needed to stay hidden even if the source code was inspected.”
Upon delivery of the software design and documentation on CD to Mrs. Yang, Curtis again explained to her that it would be impossible to hide routines created to manipulate the vote if anybody would be able to inspect the precompiled source code.
Mrs. Yang then told him, “You donâ€™t understand, in order to get the contract we have to hide the manipulation in the source code. This program is needed to control the vote in South Florida.” [emphasis in affidavit]
Brad Blog, who broke the story, has had their servers melt down under the load. Keep trying.
In a bizarre twist, Crooks and Liars reports Brad Blog is saying whistleblower Clint Curtis’ dog died suddenly and mysteriously three hours after the story appeared.
So, who is Clint Curtis? Why did he release the affadavit now (and not before the election) and does he have proof of these meetings? This may be true, but something here doesn’t sound quite right…
A stolen election, the view from my black helicopter
From Greg Palast
I’d just stepped out of my black helicopter to read that one of my favorite journalists, David Corn, had attacked my analysis of the vote in Ohio as the stuff of “grassy knoll conspiracy theorists.” (“A Stolen Election,” The Nation, November 29 issue.)
David Corn of course is the former pretend progressive now a whiny D.C. Democrat who spends inordinate time pompously bleating at anyone he deems leftish. An American Christopher Hitchens, you might say.
Oh, my! And all because I wrote that the uncounted ballots in Ohio — more than a quarter million designated “spoiled” or “provisional” — undoubtedly contain enough votes to overturn George Bush’s “victory” margin of 136,000.
Corn says, “Palast wrongly assumes that an overwhelming majority of these ballots contain votes for Kerry.” Now why would I think such a thing? Maybe because the precinct-by-precinct analysis of “spoiled” votes (those which machines can’t count) by Professor Mark Salling of Cleveland State University, the unchallengeable expert on Ohio voting demographics, concludes that “spoiled” punch cards in Ohio cities come “overwhelmingly” from African-American neighborhoods.
The Republican Secretary of State of Ohio does not disagree, by the way; he intends to fix the Jim Crow vote-counting problem in Ohio Å sometime after the next inaugural ball.
The second group of uncounted ballots, “provisionals,” were also generated substantially in African-American areas, the direct result of a Republican program to hunt down, challenge and suppress the votes cast in black-majority precincts.
What happened in Ohio is one-fiftieth of a nationwide phenomenon: the non-count of African-American votes, about a million of them marked as unreadable in a typical presidential race.
Us conspiracy nuts on the Grassy Knoll hold to our wild belief that most black citizens whose ballots were spoiled or rejected tried to vote for the tall guy from Massachusetts.
Palast, a former forsenic accountant, knows how to assemble facts and get documents. That’s how he broke the story of the 200 Florida vote fraud – research and documentation.