Category Archives: Acorn voter fraud

Al Franken, MN senate election, Minnesota judge declares uncounted absentee ballots open to public inspection, January 8, 2010, Norm Coleman Republican opponent, Recount and court battle 312 votes

The MN senate race between Democrat Al Franken and Republican Norm Coleman smelled from start to finish. Recounts and a court decision handed Al Franken the senate seat with a margin of 312 votes.

From the Star Tribune, January 6, 2010.

“Minn. judge grants access to rejected ’08 ballots”

“ST. PAUL, Minn. – Six months after Democrat Al Franken tardily joined the U.S. Senate, a Minnesota judge has declared that uncounted absentee ballots from the drawn-out 2008 election should be open to public inspection.
The New Year’s Eve ruling from Ramsey County Judge Dale Lindman granted a media outlet’s request to inspect absentee ballots rejected as flawed, potentially giving a new glimpse into a Senate race that stretched well into 2009. Franken outlasted Republican incumbent Norm Coleman in a recount and court battle and won by 312 votes.
The ruling has its limitations and could be appealed. And there doesn’t appear to be any legal avenue for Coleman to change the election’s outcome.
For now, the decision applies only to Ramsey County, Minnesota’s second most populous. KSTP-TV and other Hubbard Broadcasting Corp. affiliates sued for access to the ballots there and have begun the legal process in Douglas, Olmsted and St. Louis counties, said Mark Anfinson, an attorney for the stations. No political interest is a party to the lawsuit.
Anfinson said he hopes Minnesota’s other 86 counties voluntarily defer to Lindman’s ruling. The goal of the ballot examination is to fully understand what worked and what didn’t in Minnesota’s election so policymakers can consider law changes, he said.
But even if as many as 10,000 uncounted ballots are eventually opened, it won’t be as simple as adding to each candidate’s tally.
“There’s no doubt that under any scheme of absentee ballot regulation some of those would be rejected,” Anfinson said. “There’s considerable effort that’s going to have to be invested in understanding why certain ballots weren’t accepted and others were.”

Rejected absentee ballots were a point of contention in the protracted election. Franken’s lawyers fought to get them re-examined and have some included in the count. During an election trial, Coleman’s attorneys tried to get more added by arguing that standards were inconsistently applied, with some counties taking a tougher stand than others.
For absentee ballots to count in Minnesota, voters must be registered, have a qualified witness, mail their signed ballot envelopes back before to Election Day and not cast a replacement ballot at the polls.”

Read more:

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/80791362.html?elr=KArks:DCiUocOaL_nDaycUiacyKUUr

We have so much on our plates already. However, this procedural catastrophe, which I consider to be chicanery, should be investigated further. 

Thanks to the great commenter and patriot Joyce.

ACORN, Health Care Bill, Harry Reid, Manager’s amendment, Racial quotas, Department of Health and Human Services

From One News Now, December 23, 2009.

“Who benefits from Senate healthcare? ACORN!”

“A legal scholar says the Senate healthcare bill is not only stuffed full of racial quotas and preferences, but it also gives the disgraced liberal activist group ACORN opportunities to receive funding from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

 
Harry Reid’s (D-Nevada) “manager’s amendment” in the Senate healthcare bill requires that six federal agencies each establish an “Office of Minority Health.” Under that requirement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius is supposed to award grants and contracts to organizations that are “indigenous human resource providers in communities of color” and engage in “community outreach activities” — the type of work ACORN says it has been doing for years.
 
Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at The Heritage Foundation, says scandal-plagued ACORN — the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now — is exactly the kind of organization that will be applying for and receiving these federal funds.
 
“It illustrates this wrong assumption that’s all throughout this huge bill, and that is there are all these racial preferences and racial quotas everywhere in it,” he explains.  “There’s this whole assumption by the left that the disparities in healthcare have to do with the racial background of doctors — something that is completely untrue — and it’s these kinds of things that in fact may worsen healthcare across the country.””

Read more:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=826068

Andrew Breitbart, ACORN, Breaking News, December 15, 2009, NY Grand Jury, Big Government, ACORN sting operations, Hannah Giles, James O’Keefe, posing as prostitute and pimp

Breaking news brought to us by Andrea Shea King, December 15, 2009.

Just got off the phone with Andrew Breitbart with news that he’s given me the green light to break:
Andrew has been suddenly summoned to appear before a Grand Jury in NY tomorrow morning, related to the ACORN sting operations exposed in Big Government with Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe posing as prostitute and pimp respectively.
Thus, he will be inflight, winging his way to NY tonight at the same time he was scheduled to be with us.  Andrew assures me he will join us at a later date and asked me to in his place,  invite Mike Flynn, editor in chief of Big Government, who has appeared several times on the Larry Kudlow show, Fox News’ Glenn Beck’s and Sean Hannity’s programs.  A quick phone call later, and Mike will be on with us.

Here’s a clip of Mike with Glenn Beck… tune in tonight!  Link to listen.



THE ANDREA SHEA KING SHOW
Weeknights  @ 9 pm EST
on BlogTalkRadio dot com
                            ***
Opinion writing at
RadioPatriot.wordpress dot com
Big Hollywood.breitbart dot com
                            ***
Weekly Column
Surfin Safari @ World Net Daily
WND dot com
                           ***
VOICE of  LIBERTY Podcast Network
Contributor
VoiceOfLibertyPodcast dot com

ACORN funding cut, Judge Nina Gershon, December 14, 2009, Open Thread, Left hypocracy, Separation of powers, Judicial out of control, US Constitution

I have been reading and analyzing the ruling from US District Court Judge Nina Gershon, the complaint filed by ACORN attorneys and associated legal opinions and definitions. Judge Gershon, appointed by Bill Clinton, has a far left liberal view of the world and this comes through in her decisions.

How convenient and how liberal

When Obama obtained the electoral college vote and sanction from Congress (in defiance of the US Constitution) it was touted as the will of the people.
Now Congress has cut off funding to ACORN, it has the authority to do so, and District Court Judge Gershon (in defiance of the US Constitution) has ruled this unconstitutional.

Judge Gershon refers to the separation of powers and mistakenly does so when she buys into or embraces the alleged Bill of Attainder from Congress. In reality, she is violating the separation of powers when she impedes Congress from exercising their consitutional mandate to fund or remove funds on behalf of the American people.

This pattern of being guided by far left liberal agendas followed by  irresponsible rulings has been manifest for many years. You may remember the case from November 1999, the so called art exhibit containing a painting of the Virgin Mary that includes some elephant dung. It was apparent from Judge Gershon’s ruling then that she had an agenda that was contrary to protecting the American public and taxpayers.

“Mayor Says Judge Rushed Decision in Museum Case”

“Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani accused a federal judge yesterday of rushing to issue her ruling in the Brooklyn Museum of Art case to block city lawyers from fully investigating the finances of the museum’s ”Sensation” exhibition.

Mr. Giuliani stepped up his attacks on Judge Nina Gershon of United States District Court in Brooklyn one day after she ruled that he had no right to cut the museum’s city financing because he felt ”Sensation” was offensive and blasphemous. The exhibition includes displays of dead animals and a painting of the Virgin Mary that includes some elephant dung.”

Read more:

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/03/nyregion/mayor-says-judge-rushed-decision-in-museum-case.html

The trend is obvious. Judge Nina Gershon has an agenda that blinds her from a realistic interpretation of the US Constitution, one that protects the citizens of the US.

I hope to present a more technical analysis of Judge Gershon’s ruling soon.

WE must insist that Congress not comply with this radical ruling. Tell them to press on.

ACORN, Judge Nina Gershon, US Constitution, Idiot judges, US Congress, ACORN funding, Open thread, December 13, 2009

We must give Congress an enema in 2010. Vote out jackasses, vote in statesmen who adhere to the US Constitution.

With the assistance of a new congress, we must next remove the illegal usurper Barack Obama.

Then we must remove incompetent, biased judges, state officials and then fix our schools.

Many of you are aware of a absurd decision by US District Court Judge, Nina Gershon. There are several possible reasons for Judge Gershon arriving at her unconstitutional conclusion. I can state with authority that the far left wackos have inundated the internet with their Orwellian word smithing to make it appear that Congress has broken the law by cutting off funding to ACORN. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Read the decision, do some research and check back here. I have read enough already to know that this judge should be impeached.

Judge Nina Gershon Decision
http://ccrjustice.org/files/Judge%20Gershon%2012%2011%202009%20PI%20Order.pdf

Michele Bachmann warning, Breaking News, ACORN, TARP II, CFPA Oversight Board, Barney Frank, Democrats, Taxpayer bailouts permanent solution, systemic risk regulator, Breitbart TV interview

Representative Michele Bachmann has put out an urgent plea to stop a dangerous bill about to be voted on.

From Michele Bachmann’s site.

“Bachmann: House Preserves ACORN’s Role in TARP II

 
 
Washington, D.C., Dec 10 –

(Washington, D.C.) U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann (MN-06), member of the House Financial Services Committee, made the following statement after the Democrat Leadership denied the entire House an opportunity to vote on her amendment to prevent ACORN from participating in the Consumer Financial Protection Agency’s Oversight Board.  The Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) is an expansive new government bureaucracy with far-reaching powers to make decisions for consumers about the kinds of mortgages, small business loans, and other financial products they may access.  The Oversight Board will be tasked with advising the Agency’s director on strategies and policies.

“An organization that has repeatedly shown an inability to adhere to even the most basic standards of ethics should not have a role in overseeing our nation’s financial system,” said Bachmann.  “By rejecting consideration of my amendment, the Democrat Majority protected ACORN instead of American taxpayers and investors.”

In recent months, the IRS, U.S. Census Bureau, and Congress have taken numerous actions to sever ties with ACORN.  In fact, less than two months ago, the House Financial Services Committee accepted another amendment offered by Bachmann that would prevent ACORN from serving on a similar board established in the exact same bill under consideration this week.

“There is a clear consensus amongst the American people that ACORN is unfit to receive federal funds and partner with federal organizations.  The Democrat Leadership’s decision today robs Congress from having the opportunity to take an up-or-down vote on my amendment and keep ACORN out of our financial markets,” said Bachmann.”

Star Tribune: Giving more power where power is not due
Wall Street and bureaucracy would benefit from pending reform.

 
Washington, D.C., Dec 11 –

The majority of Americans last fall were united against the $700 billion Wall Street bailout known as TARP. Proponents of the bill urged immediate action, claiming that a failure to act quickly would send the financial industry over the brink. They promised to examine the root cause of the crisis once financial markets were secure. One year later, the House is considering legislation that will result in the most far-reaching reforms of the financial services industry in our nation’s history.

But instead of addressing the real causes of the financial collapse and fixing bad government policies that led to the crisis, congressional Democrats want to codify the fiscally irresponsible bailout mania. Their bill would make taxpayer bailouts the permanent solution for dealing with reckless financial institutions in the future.

The 1,300-plus-page bill the House is scheduled to vote on today creates a “systemic risk regulator” tasked with determining which firms meet an undefined “too big to fail” test. It allows the government to tap a multibillion-dollar bailout fund to save troubled firms whenever it wants. This fund will be initially financed by a massive new tax on financial institutions and is expected to take $55 billion out of the hands of small businesses and job creators, leading to a loss of as many as 450,000 jobs. Should that fund run dry, taxpayers are on the hook to replenish it. And unlike TARP, this bill authorizes the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve to completely bypass congressional approval and directly provide such lifelines to flailing firms.

The moral hazard this bill creates will ripple through the entire financial marketplace. Providing banks with a bailout guarantee will perpetuate a cycle of irresponsibility, shielding creditors from taking the fall for making risky decisions and forcing taxpayers to ante up again and again.

Rather than increasing transparency within the Federal Reserve and directing it to focus on the nation’s monetary policy, this bill drastically expands the powers of the Fed to intervene in the private marketplace. But the Federal Reserve has already proven its inability to preemptively catch systemic risks as demonstrated by the financial crisis that occurred under its watch. Giving more power to government bureaucracies that have failed in the past will do nothing to stabilize our markets.

I support an alternative plan that addresses both the core problems in our financial system and promises American taxpayers that they will not be on the hook for Wall Street’s mistakes ever again. Three key principles guide this proposal: 1) It ends government bailouts of financial institutions; 2) It stops allowing the government to pick winners and losers in the financial industry; and 3) It reinstates market discipline by removing moral hazards that exist today.

Minnesotans know when Washington is trying to pull a fast one. While the government takeover of health care and total lack of job growth is at the forefront of everyone’s minds, we cannot let this permanent bailout legislation slip through Congress without a fight.”

http://bachmann.house.gov/News/

Must hear interview of Michele Bachmann

Breitbart TV

 

http://www.breitbart.tv/bachmann-on-the-b-cast-a-conservative-call-to-action/#

Thanks to commenter Katie.

Doug Hoffman, NY 23 election, New York Election Statutes, NY Law, Impossible numbers certified, Richard Hayes Phillips PhD, St. Lawrence County Board of Elections, Negative numbers, Phantom voters, Computerized voting

****  Important update below  ****

**** Correction by John Charlton, November 27, 2:30 PM ET ****

From The Gouverneur Times.

“Impossible Numbers Certified in NY-23

Written by Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.   
Wednesday, 25 November 2009 15:32”

“The election results certified by the St. Lawrence County Board of Elections for New York’s 23rd Congressional District contain some numbers that are mathematically impossible.  These numbers were requested in person and transmitted by e-mail just hours before certification on Tuesday, November 24th, 2009.

For six election districts in St. Lawrence County (the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 7th districts in Canton, the 14th district in Massena, and the 2nd district in Oswegatchie) negative numbers appear in the column for “blank” ballots, known in other states as “undervotes.”

Blank vote counts are ballots in which the voter did not choose any candidate in a given election and are determined by subtracting the total number of votes cast for the candidates from the number of voters who completed ballots.  The remaining number would be those voters who didn’t cast a vote for that election.

In Canton’s 7th district, the certified results show a total of 148 ballots cast. The results of those votes were counted as 88 votes for Owens, 11 votes for Scozzafava, and 80 votes for Hoffman.  The problem is that these numbers add up to 179 votes counted for the candidates, and there were only 148 ballots cast;  St. Lawrence County certified these numbers to the state as accurate with the number of ‘blank’ ballots reported as -31.

The Board of Elections stated repeatedly that their numbers add up, and strictly speaking, they do.  But negative numbers should not be required to make this happen. 

Election analysts refer to this phenomenon as “phantom voters,” because they are apparitions.  They do not actually exist.  There can never be more votes counted for any office than the number of actual voters who cast ballots.  There could be one or two, if on occasion an actual voter forgot to sign the poll book, but never 31.”

“Fundamentally, the fault does not lie with the Board of Elections, although perhaps they should have noticed the negative numbers before certifying them.  The fault lies with computerized vote counting and our willingness to trust it.
It has already been reported that zero votes were incorrectly reported in numerous precincts in Jefferson, Madison, and Oswego Counties for one of the Congressional candidates, and that voting machine failures occurred in dozens of polling places in at least three different counties.
In St. Lawrence County, ballots from eight polling places had to be hand counted due to voting machine failure.  Machines in Louisville, Waddington, Clare, and Rossie “broke” early in the voting process on Election Day.  Republican Commissioner Deborah Pahler said that the machines kept “freezing up… like Windows does all the time”.  Machines in Hermon, Lawrence, Colton’s 2nd district, and Massena’s 1st and 2nd districts failed to print the results. Frank Hoar, an attorney for the Democratic Party, initially ordered the impoundment of malfunctioning machines but released the order on November 5th so that Bill Owens could be sworn in to Congress in time to vote on the House health bill on November 7th.
Electronic vote counting is much too vulnerable to failure and/or manipulation.  If a mechanical (lever-style) machine breaks down, the failure is visible, and only the one machine is affected.  With electronic vote counting, one person can change the outcome of an election and not leave a trace.  This has been shown over and over again in scientific studies, including those commissioned by the Secretaries of State in California and Ohio.
But more than that, how can we have a democracy if we cannot know if the vote count is accurate?  If election officials cannot know, and if the candidates cannot know, and if the voters cannot know that the official results are true and correct, why even have an election?  Why go through the motions?”

Read more:

http://www.gouverneurtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8425:impossible-numbers-certified-in-ny-23&catid=60:st-lawrence-news&Itemid=175

Several days ago, as I am prone to do, I read the New York State Election statutes. Before the election in 2008 I read almost half of the 50 states election laws. Here are some of those statutes regarding voting irregularities. Read them and decide if any of them apply to the chicanery that has taken place.
” §  17-106.  Misconduct  of election officers. Any election officer who
  wilfully refuses to accord to any duly  accredited  watcher  or  to  any
  voter  or candidate any right given him by this chapter, or who wilfully
  violates any provision of the election law relative to the  registration
  of  electors or to the taking, recording, counting, canvassing, tallying
  or certifying of votes, or who wilfully neglects or refuses  to  perform
  any  duty  imposed  on  him  by  law,  or  is guilty of any fraud in the
  execution of the duties of his office,  or  connives  in  any  electoral
  fraud, or knowingly permits any such fraud to be practiced, is guilty of
  a felony.

§  17-108.  False  affidavits;  mutilation,  destruction  or  loss  of
  registry list or affidavits. 1. Any person who wilfully  loses,  alters,
  destroys or mutilates the list of voters or registration poll ledgers in
  any  election  district,  or  a  certified  copy thereof, is guilty of a
  misdemeanor.
    2. An applicant for registration who shall make, incorporate or  cause
  to  be  incorporated  a  material  false statement in an application for
  registration, or in any challenge or other  affidavit  required  for  or
  made  or filed in connection with registration or voting, and any person
  who knowingly takes a  false  oath  before  a  board  of  inspectors  of
  election,  and  any  person  who  makes  a material false statement in a
  medical  certificate  or  an  affidavit  filed  in  connection  with  an
  application for registration, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
    3. A person who shall wilfully suppress, mutilate or alter, or, except
  as  authorized  by  this chapter, shall destroy, any signed challenge or
  other affidavit required  for  or  made  or  filed  in  connection  with
  registration or voting, and any person who, except as authorized by this
  chapter,  shall  remove such an affidavit from the place of registration
  or polling place, is guilty of a felony.
    4. A person other than the applicant who, prior to the filing  of  the
  application,  shall  willfully suppress, mutilate, materially alter, or,
  except as authorized by this chapter, destroy a signed  application  for
  registration by mail, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

§  17-120.  Misconduct  in  relation  to certificate of nomination and
  official ballot. A person who:
    1. Falsely makes or makes oath to, or fraudulently defaces or destroys
  a certificate of nomination or any part thereof; or,
    2. Files or receives for filing a certifiate  of  nomination,  knowing
  that any part thereof was falsely made; or,
    3.  Suppresses  a certificate of nomination which has been duly filed,
  or any part thereof; or,
    4. Forges or falsely makes the official indorsement of any ballot; or,
    5. Having charge of official ballots, destroys, conceals or suppresses
  them, except as provided by the law. is guilty of a felony.

§  17-124.  Failure  to  deliver  official ballots. Any person who has
  undertaken to deliver official ballots to  any  city,  town  or  village
  clerk,  or  inspector  as  authorized  by  this chapter, and neglects or
  refuses to do so, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

§  17-128. Violations of election law by public officer or employee. A
  public officer or employee who knowingly and wilfully omits, refuses  or
  neglects  to  perform  any  act  required  of him by this chapter or who
  knowingly and wilfully refuses to permit the doing of any act authorized
  by this chapter or who knowingly  and  wilfully  hinders  or  delays  or
  attempts  to  hinder  or delay the performance of such an act is, if not
  otherwise provided by law, guilty of a felony.

§ 17-130. Misdemeanor in relation to elections. Any person who:
    1.  Acts  as  an  inspector  of election or as a clerk at an election,
  without being able to read or write the  English  language,  or  without
  being otherwise qualified to hold such office; or,
    2.  Being  an inspector of election, knowingly and wilfully permits or
  suffers any person to vote who is not entitled to vote thereat; or,
    3. Wilfully and unlawfully obstructs, hinders or delays,  or  aids  or
  assists  in  obstructing  or  delaying  any  elector  on  his  way  to a
  registration or polling place, or while he is attempting to register  or
  vote; or,
    4.  Electioneers on election day or on days of registration within one
  hundred feet, as defined herein, from a polling place. Said  prohibition
  shall  not  apply  to  a  building  or room that has been maintained for
  political purposes at  least  six  months  prior  to  said  election  or
  registration  days,  except  that  no  political  displays,  placards or
  posters shall be exhibited therefrom. For the purposes of this  section,
  the  one  hundred feet distance shall be deemed to include a one hundred
  foot radial measured from the entrances, designated by the inspectors of
  elections, to a building where the election  or  registration  is  being
  held.
    5. Removes any official ballot from a polling place before the closing
  of the polls; or,
    6.  Unlawfully  goes  within  the  guard-rail  of any polling place or
  unlawfully remains within such guard-rail after having been commanded to
  remove therefrom by any inspector of election; or,
    7. Enters a voting booth with any voter or remains in a  voting  booth
  while  it  is occupied by any voter, or opens the door of a voting booth
  when the same is occupied by a voter, with the intent to  watch  such  a
  voter  while  engaged  in  the  preparation  of  his  ballot,  except as
  authorized by this chapter; or,
    8. Being or claiming to be a voter, permits any other person to be  in
  a  voting booth with him while engaged in the preparation of his ballot,
  except as authorized by this chapter, without openly protesting  against
  and asking that such person be ejected; or,
    9.  Having  lawfully  entered  a  voting booth with a voter, requests,
  persuades or induces such voter to vote any particular ballot or for any
  particular candidate, or makes  or  keeps  any  memorandum  of  anything
  occurring  within  the  booth,  or  directly  or  indirectly, reveals to
  another the name of any candidate voted for by such voter; or,
    10. Shows his ballot after it is prepared for voting, to any person so
  as to reveal the contents, or solicits a voter to show the same; or,
    11. Places any mark  upon  his  ballot,  or  does  any  other  act  in
  connection  with his ballot with the intent that it may be identified as
  the one voted by him; or,
    12. Places any mark upon, or does any other act in connection  with  a
  ballot  or  paster  ballot,  with  the  intent that it may afterwards be
  identified as having been voted by any particular person; or,
    13. Receives an official ballot from any person other than one of  the
  clerks or inspectors having charge of the ballots; or,
    14.  Not being an inspector of election or clerk, delivers an official
  ballot to a voter; or,
    15. Not being an inspector of election,  receives  from  any  voter  a
  ballot prepared for voting; or,
    16.  Fails to return to the inspectors of election, before leaving the
  polling place or going outside the guard-rail, each ballot not voted  by
  him; or,
    17.  Wilfully  defaces,  injures,  mutilates, destroys or secretes any
  voting maching which belongs to any municipality or board  of  elections
  for use at elections, and any person who commits or attempts to commit a
  fraud in the use of any such voting machine during election; or,
    18.  Not  being  lawfully authorized, makes or has in his possession a
  key to a voting maching which has been  adopted  and  will  be  used  in
  elections; or,
    19.  Not  being  an inspector or clerk of election, handles a voted or
  unvoted ballot or stub thereof,  during  the  canvass  of  votes  at  an
  election; or,
    20.  Intentionally  opens an absentee voter’s envelope or examines the
  contents thereof after the receipt of  the  envelope  by  the  board  of
  elections and before the close of the polls at the election; or,
    21.  Wilfully  disobeys any lawful command of the board of inspectors,
  or any member thereof; or
    22. Induces or attempts to induce any poll clerk, election  inspector,
  election  coordinator,  or  officer,  clerk  or employee of the board of
  elections discharging any duty or performing any act  required  or  made
  necessary by the election law, to do any act in violation of his duty or
  in violation of the election law; or,
    23.  Not  having  been appointed or named an inspector of elections or
  clerk and not having taken the  oath  for  such  office  shall  wear  or
  display  any  button,  badge  or  emblem  identifying  or  purporting to
  identify such person as an inspector of election or clerk, is guilty  of
  a misdemeanor.

§   17-136.  False  returns;  unlawful  acts  respecting  returns.  An
  inspector or clerk of an election who intentionally makes,  or  attempts
  to  make,  a  false  canvass  of  the ballots cast thereat, or any false
  statement of the result of a canvass, though not signed by a majority of
  the inspectors, or any person who induces or attempts to induce any such
  inspector or clerk to do so, is guilty of a felony.

§  17-148.  Bribery  or intimidation of elector in military service of
  United States. Any person  who,  directly  or  indirectly,  by  bribery,
  menace  or  any other corrupt means, controls, or attempts to control an
  elector of this state enlisted in the military  service  of  the  United
  States, in the exercise of his rights under the election law, or annoys,
  injures or punishes him for the manner in which he exercises such right,
  is guilty of a misdemeanor.

 §  17-166.  Penalty.  Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under this
  article shall for a first offense be punished by  imprisonment  for  not
  more  than  one  year, or by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars
  nor  more  than  five  hundred  dollars,  or  by  both  such  fine   and
  imprisonment.  Any  person  who,  having been convicted of a misdemeanor
  under this article, shall thereafter be convicted of another misdemeanor
  under this article, shall be guilty of a felony.

 § 17-168. Crimes against the elective franchise not otherwise provided
  for.  Any  person  who  knowingly and wilfully violates any provision of
  this chapter, which violation is not specifically covered by any of  the
  previous sections of this article, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

§  17-170.  Destroying  or  delaying  election  returns.  A  messenger
  appointed by authority of law to receive and carry a report, certificate
  or certified copy of  any  statement  relating  to  the  result  of  any
  election,   who  wilfully  mutilates,  tears,  defaces,  obliterates  or
  destroys the same, or does any other act which prevents the delivery  of
  it  as  required by law; and a person who takes away from such messenger
  any such report, certificate or certified copy, with intent  to  prevent
  its  delivery,  or  who  wilfully  does  any injury or other act in this
  section specified, is guilty of a felony.

 NY State Election Statutes:

http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/menugetf.cgi?COMMONQUERY=LAWS

****  Update  ****

John Charlton of The Post & Email has provided some important facts.

“15,620 Missing Votes are disturbing

Let’s take a look at each race, considering simply the total votes counted, and comparing this to the total votes in the Congressional race on the same ballot:

For the State Supreme Court race:  39, 969 votes

For the NY-23 Special Election: . . . . 24, 349 votes

For County Coroner: . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 664 votes

District Attorney: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 541 votes

These are the races which all used the same 102 voting machines.  Since the entire county voted for each race you’d expect nearly identical numbers, if there were identical interest in the different races.  And while that nearly never happens, the Owen-Hoffman-Scozzafava race was surely the most followed in the national and local press.

That 15,620 more votes were cast in the State Supreme Court Race than in the Congressional Race, seems simply unbelievable. That means that nearly 40% of the voters who voted, cast no vote in the Congressional Race! Unbelievable!”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/election-irregularities-in-ny-23rd-too-great-to-be-ignored/

 

**** Correction by John Charlton, November 27, 2:30 PM ET ****

“4,200 Votes in the NY-23 race are questionable
Let’s take a look at each county-wide race, in St. Lawrence Country, considering simply the total votes counted, and comparing this to the total votes in the Congressional race on the same ballot:
For the NY-23 Special Election: . . . . . 24, 349 votes
For the State Supreme Court race:  39, 969 votes or potentially 19,986 votes*
District Attorney: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17, 541 votes
For County Coroner: . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 664 votes or potentially 14,832 votes*

These are the races which all used the same 102 voting machines.  Since the entire county voted for each race you’d expect nearly identical numbers, if there were identical interest in the different races.  And while that nearly never happens, the Owen-Hoffman-Scozzafava race was surely the most followed in the national and local press.”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/11/27/election-irregularities-in-ny-23rd-too-great-to-be-ignored/

 

Doug Hoffman, No recount, Election over, Sequoia voting machines, Count errors, Voter fraud, Nancy Pelosi, NY district 23, Bill Owens broke 4 campaign promises

Doug Hoffman, who narrowly lost the congressional race in NY District 23 to Bill Owens, has declared that the election is over and there will be no recount. This comes after numerous errors were committed election night, Nancy Pelosi certifying Bill Owens the winner, before he was certified by the state of New York, in time to vote for the Health Care Bill, and known software bugs or tampering with of the controversial Sequoia voting machines.

Doug Hoffman, on one level this was your decision to make. However, we are in different times. This is not the country your parents knew.

We have entered a new world, a post Nazi takeover, Orwellian world where being polite or naively playing the gentleman card as Nevile Chamberlain did with the Germans, will result in catastrophe. On a higher level, Mr. Hoffman, this is the decision of New York residents and ultimately the American people. Regardless of your actions or your next move, this serious breach of the public trust, must be investigated. As I and others have stated, Barack Obama, the Obama camp and Obama thugs, including, but not limited to ACORN and SEIU, stole the Democratic primaries and caucuses through election fraud and intimidation. With warnings issued early in 2008 about voting machines and possible control of them by Chavez’s Venezuela or muslim countries, and now the evidence from the NY District 23 election, God only knows the extent that voting machines altered vote counts in 2008. We must protect our elections going forward.

We must have an investigation. 

  

Dear Friends,
Today, Tuesday, November 24, 2009, it is with a heavy heart that we declare this election over.  We will formally end this election and not ask for a recount.  This was a difficult choice to make because so many people have put their faith, hope and aspirations into our campaign.
 Yes, there seem to have been many vote counting problems, missed vote counts and, as was recently reported by the Gouvernour Times, software problems in the computerized voting machines. Despite these incidents, I do not believe the voters of NY-23, or New Yorkers in general, would be well-served by a disruptive and costly recount that would most likely not change the election outcome.
 I know many are disappointed and even angry. To those I say now is not the time to look back, but to focus on the future and ensure that next year we win back this district decidedly. Know this decision was not an easy one. I did not want to let down those who worked so hard, donated so much and shared their enthusiasm for retaking our country with common-sense conservative values.
And rest assured, our energies are now directed toward 2010. This election, in which a third party candidate narrowly lost, showed that principles do matter.  Special interests do have an Achilles’ heel, the American people. Main-street conservatism’s voice is now echoing through the government chambers and boardrooms that shape America. By most measures, this campaign was a success and I have you all to thank for this. And all of us have to thank the Conservative Party of New York State for nominating a candidacy like ours.
We take away lessons from this year’s campaign that will make us stronger and more competitive in the future. Next time we will be better prepared. Many people forget that our campaign only began in earnest three months ago. Most campaigns of this stature take at least a year to prepare. In three months, we almost toppled an entrenched political system and successfully defied the conventional thinking of the elite political punditry. Citizen government is making a comeback in America.
I thank everyone who participated in this campaign and urge each one of you to stand with me in the future. We have a calling that we must answer. My opponent in this race quickly abandoned the promises he made to his voters. Within the first hour of being sworn in by Nancy Pelosi, Bill Owens broke 4 campaign promises — so much for change in Washington. We must resoundingly defeat him next year and, with your help, I promise to help restore our nation’s faith in elected officials when we win.
But there is more to do than just win back NY-23 in 2010. We must work to help other like-minded citizen candidates win across the country.  We need to make time to help other candidates who are working for the principles we hold dear — other fiscal, common-sense conservatives.  Together we can successfully take back our great nation, one legislator and one member at a time. We need more than one common-sense conservative voice in the echo chamber of liberal, spend thrift cacophony if we are to redirect our great country.
I would also like to commend those election commission officials who worked tirelessly and may have taken offense to an unfortunate and poorly worded fundraising email that was sent out toward the end of our campaign.  As we tried to make sense of the false vote counts and stories of software viruses in the voting machines, we never intended to imply the election commissioners had somehow acted improperly. This was never our intention and, on the contrary, the election commissioners went above and beyond to uphold their duty to ensure a fair election took place. I owe them a debt of gratitude for all they have done.
So where to now? Full speed ahead to 2010. This gives us time to carefully articulate and communicate thoughtful positions on issues that impact the great people of our district and ensure that our campaign promises are NOT broken.  Best of all, it allows me to work hand-in-hand with the many supporters who shared their ideas, their concerns and their dreams with me.
We need to continue to stand united because we cannot spend our way out of recession or tax our way to prosperity. We must continue to fight to protect our liberties and protect those who are yet to be born.  We must protect our country against terrorists and protect the sanctity of marriage. We must fix our corrupt tax code, our immigration policy and our educational system.  Most of all, we must defend the free enterprise system that made America the greatest and most prosperous country in the world.  Although I’m conceding an election today, I do it with the certainty that we will win back this seat a year from now.  I am certain of this because our mission is too big, the country’s problems too dire and the American people are too smart.
Thank you for all you have done and will continue to do. “We the people” are retaking America.

Doug Hoffman, this is bigger than you or the election in NY. We are at a crucial point in the history of this country. The actions we take now will determine the security and pursuit of life, liberty and happiness that our descendants and ultimately the entire world will enjoy.

Mr. Hoffman, you have chosen to end the election. I urge you to not end the cause.

Wells

Acorn corruption, Dumpster documents, Andrew Breitbart, Private investigator Derrick Roach, Acorn office, National City CA, San Diego County, Hannah Giles, James O’Keefe, Undercover videos

“ACORN Report
The ACORN Report is published by ACORN’s National Office and contains up-to-date information. We have ACORN Reports indexed by date and topic available.”

“City Limits February 1999
During its 15 years in New York City, ACORN has helped squatters claim derelict city-owned property, forced bankers to invest in low-income communities, and organized a war against the city’s workfare program.

It’s also developed a reputation for no-holds-barred tactics—getting results through adversarial campaigns against bankers, politicians and bureaucrats using confrontation and concession rather than consensus. ACORN, unlike most social service non-profits, scorns charity. Their goal is to help poor people seize power.”

In ACORN’s own words, confrontation and seize power. It is no wonder that an organization with that open agenda would do more brazen deeds behind the scenes.

John Charleton of The Post & Email has brought to our attention more investigative reporting from Andrew Breitbart and Private Investigator Derrick Roach.

November 23, 2009

“DOCUMENT DISCOVERY SHEDS LIGHT ON ACORN’S ROLE IN 2008 ELECTION FRAUD”

“Private Eye and genuine Patriot Derrick Roach has reported how he took it upon himself to investigate the activities of ACORN’s office in National City (San Diego County, CA). After damning undercover video work by Citizen Heroes Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe and the subsequent revelation of criminal and civil activities, comes now stunning new revelations by way of a myriad of sensitive internal Acorn documents, files and records fecklessly deposited in a public dumpster and recovered by Roach during his investigative work on the evening of Oct 9, 2009.

Accounts show that this dumping, took place days prior to the Attorney General’s scheduled visit regarding an investigation opened on October 1st, 2009 by California Attorney General Jerry Brown. Brown announced that an investigation has been opened into ACORN’s activities in California, resulting from undercover videos showing what appears to be employees willingly offering and advancing to assist the undercover film makers Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe, posing as a prostitute and her pimp, seeking advice with human smuggling, child prostitution and tax evasion.”

“I am a local licensed private investigator. I took it upon myself to keep an eye on what the local ACORN office was up to, in light of the release of the undercover (Giles-O’Keefe) videos. I retrieved these documents from the public dumpster.”

“ACORN’s political agenda is also exposed, with thousands upon thousands of documents revealing the depth of the political machine that is ACORN, and its disturbing ties to not only public employee labor unions but some of the most radical leftist organizations.”

“In what is rapidly appearing to be a meltdown of Marxist Agenda, further revealing scandal, criminal and anti Liberty activities. The Alinsky/Obama Cabal is having their agendas and plans for world domination uncovered and their Asses handed to them at an ever-increasing rate. Due mostly to Citizen Journalists and Blog Runners with the New Media Pioneers doing yeoman’s duty, Freedom loving peoples the world over now have access to the truth.”

Read more:

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/massive-acorn-document-dump/

From Andrew Breitbart’s website, November 23, 2009

“The next phase will be the evidentiary phase.  Starting with, but not limited to an extraordinary document dump at the San Diego office that was one of the offices  O’Keefe and Giles exposed, causing the firing of a single employee.
On October 1, California Attorney General Jerry Brown, who once again aspires to be the state’s governor, announced that he was investigating  not just ACORN in California, but also the truth tellers who exposed the alleged corruption and illegality.

Last night, I hosted a three-hour show on KFI 640 AM, the largest radio  station in the country, and use the opportunity to announce the  existence of 20,000 deeply sensitive and highly political documents  discovered in the dumpster behind ACORN in San Diego on October 9,  nine days after ACORN was announced to be under state investigation.

Some might call that “obstruction of justice.”

Listen to the entire interview with the private investigator who filled his Suburban with the documents in the following audio. It is explosive radio that hopefully shows the proper authorities that ACORN is making a mockery of this country’s laws and judicial process.”

Read more and listen to interview:

http://biggovernment.com/2009/11/23/acorn-scandal-part-2-the-evidentiary-phase/

The Citizen Wells blog has been reporting on ACORN corruption and voter fraud and ties to Barack Obama, SEIU and socialist and communist organizations for well over a year. A search on ACORN will yield many articles. The source for the quotes at the top can be found here. You will find it interesting.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010421194739/www.acorn.org/acorn-reports/acornrep.politics.content.html

Doug Hoffman race, Sequoia voting machine, Election fraud?, NY District 23, Beta test, Pilot program, Leftists fraud, Princeton University study, Voting machine fraud

“You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.”…Abraham Lincoln

 

Early in the 2008 election cycle there was widespread concern about voter fraud and intimidation. It is believed by many, including myself, that Obama and his thugs stole the Democratic primaries and caucuses. There has been much discussion about the 2010 elections and continued voter fraud and suspect voting machines. Earlier today the Citizen Wells blog reported on more suspicion about the NY District 23 congressional race, narrowly lost by Doug Hoffman.

“We in the 23rd were the subject of a ‘beta test, pilot program’, in the midst of a very important election. There were many problems as a result of this ‘test’. The integrity, credibility and voter confidence in this election is severely challenged as a result. A manual hand count needs to be accomplished in order to assure the voters that the Sequoia/Dominion ImageCast machines worked and worked accurately. Not doing so will forever taint the results of this ‘beta test’ election as well as future elections.

It is not a matter of who won or who lost… it is a matter of our constitutional right to a fair, open and honest election process without vendors protecting their interests (Sequoia), or a State covering their collective <actions>… at the expense of the voting process itself.”
Sequoia voting machines suspect

From American Thinker, August 16, 2009.

“Do you really believe that the next elections in 2010 and particularly 2012 will be the solution to the current socialist infestation?  Do you think that people who are as addicted to power as Obama, Emmanuel, and Axelrod will passively accept their ouster in a fair general election?  After fighting the good fight, will they gracefully withdraw from power?”

“Leftists do not see election fraud or other dirty tactics as illegal, immoral, or unethical.  This is because the socialist agenda is for the good of the nation, a noble cause to promote and protect at any cost.  In other words, the ends justify the means.  In the final analysis, it is difficult to predict what they are capable of.  The rules don’t apply to them.  We can only study the actions of other socialist leaders such as Lenin, Stalin, Castro, and Chavez, and make assumptions.”

Read more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/beware_the_counterrevolution.html

Voting machine fraud was not my highest priority early in 2008, but it was a concern. From some email exchanges:

Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 4:46 PM

“Have you investigated the companies and software engineers that
provide voting machines and support in this country?
Wells”

Response.
Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 4:49 PM

Haven’t taken a look at them, truthfully… I am worried that the companies tend not to open source their software, though, as scrutiny should drive out bugs in software and demonstrate transparency and honesty in the system.

From another person.

Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 11:13 AM

“and that several of the voting machine companies have very deep Muslim and Venezuelan ties.”

Notice how well informed and ahead of the curve these great CW commenters are:

Submitted on 2009/07/23 at 10:28am   Nancy

“The electronic voting machines are ‘Sequoia’. They are used in NJ. Princeton Univ. did some tests & found they could be easily hacked into within a few minutes to change voting results.”

Submitted on 2009/11/03 at 9:43am   Linda from NY

“Coming Elections: At least 20 states will be using electronic Sequoia voting systems (A Venezuelan company with strong ties to Hugo Chavez) at polling stations”

Submitted on 2009/11/05 at 9:12am   Truth Now

“C.W.
Please investigate
http://www.repubx.com
2 articles on Sequoia software,Venz.company,Hugo Chavez connections.
In 8 states now more to come,used in many New York voting machines
Can alter votes in 5 minutes.
Is this why Hoffman lost?
Used also in Last yrs.Presidential elections
Needs to be exposed
All COPY AND PRINT ARTICLES AND NEEDS INVESTIGATING ASAP”

Submitted on 2009/11/16 at 10:33am   Patriot Dreamer

“I do not have a Facebook account (and have no interest in getting one), but the following excert was posted on Doug

Hoffman’s Facebook page:

“Our Campaign Is Not Over Yet!

So many people have written hoping we continue the fight, count every ballot and make sure no one steals this election.

Acorn and the unions did their best to try and say that the conservative movement was a sham. Rest assured they will not succeed. On Election Night the information we received was far different from what we received this week. They will not silence our voice that easily!

There is also the fact that NY is using the Sequoia Voting Systems machines. Princeton University

(http://citp.princeton.edu/voting/advantage/) cited them as having been susceptible to voter fraud in the past. There’s a reason why the State of California BANNED them. Yet we must now prepare for this possibility as well.

We are working to get the message out that this election is far from over! Our campaign and the New York Conservative Party is watching this recount and preparing for our next course of action. On Friday Doug appeared on Cavuto on FoxNews and will appear on Glen Beck’s radio show on Monday. It is a call-to-arms for conservatives. Help however you can; post blogs, comment on websites and donate to help us mount a challenge if need be!”

h/t:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2387250/posts

Submitted on 2009/11/16 at 1:01pm   bob strauss
“Glennmcgahee, I read a story a while back about the voting machines in Honduras. They were preloaded with enough votes to guarantee Zelaya’s victory.
The voting machines were Sequoia software also, and Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela company designed that software.”

Submitted on 2009/11/19 at 7:01pm   John Charlton

http://thepostnemail.wordpress.com/2009/11/19/virus-introduced-into-sequoia-voting-machines-in-ny-23/

“Virus in voting machines: analysis of salient facts points to Dominion/Sequoia”

Center for Information Technology Policy, Princeton University

“Insecurities and Inaccuracies of the
Sequoia AVC Advantage 9.00H DRE Voting Machine

by Andrew W. Appel1, Maia Ginsburg1, Harri Hursti,
Brian W. Kernighan1, Christopher D. Richards1, and Gang Tan2.
1Princeton University     2Lehigh University

The AVC Advantage voting machine is made by Sequoia Voting Systems and has been used in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and other states. Pursuant to a Court Order in New Jersey Superior Court, we examined this voting machine as well as its computer program code. On October 17, 2008 the Court permitted us to release to the public a redacted version of our report.

Public Report: Insecurities and Inaccuracies of the Sequoia AVC Advantage 9.00H DRE Voting Machine (click here)
This report was originally submitted to the Court on September 2 in the form of an expert-witness report by Andrew W. Appel. The Court has released this redacted version to the public. The version we release here, linked in boldface above, is the same as the Court’s redacted version, but with a few introductory paragraphs about the court case, Gusciora v. Corzine.

Videos: click here. We can now release the 90-minute evidentiary video that we submitted to the Court on September 2nd. We are seeking the Court’s permission to release a much shorter video which demonstrates the most important points much more succinctly.

Frequently Asked Questions (“Why are you releasing this just 3 weeks before the election?” etc.)

What you need to know:

The AVC Advantage contains a computer. If someone installs a different computer program for that computer to run, it can deliberately add up the votes wrong. It’s easy to make a computer program that steals votes from one party’s candidates, and gives them to another, while taking care to make the total number of votes come out right. It’s easy to make this program take care to cheat only on election day when hundreds of ballots are cast, and not cheat when the machine is being tested for accuracy. This kind of fraudulent computer program can modify every electronic “audit trail” in the computer. Without voter-verified paper ballots, it’s extremely hard to know whether a voting machine (such as the AVC Advantage) is running the right program.

It takes about 7 minutes, using simple tools, to replace the computer program in the AVC Advantage with a fraudulent program that cheats. We demonstrate this on the video.

Even when it’s not hacked to deliberately steal votes, the AVC Advantage has a few user-interface flaws. Therefore, sometimes the AVC Advantage does not properly record the intent of the voter. All known voting technologies have imperfect user interfaces, although some are worse than others. The public should beware of the argument that some people make, that “we should not replace the AVC Advantage with voting method X, because X is imperfect.” The AVC Advantage’s susceptibility to installation of a fraudulent vote-counting program is far more than an imperfection: it is a fatal flaw.

What should be done? Most technology experts who study the security of voting methods recommend precinct-count optical-scan voting, with by-hand audits of the optical-scan ballots from randomly selected precincts. We agree with this consensus. In fact, most states are moving in the right direction: 32 states now vote with voter-verified paper ballots (mostly optical-scan, some with DRE+VVPAT). Only a minority of states are still using paperless DRE voting machines such as the AVC Advantage. We recommend that those states adopt precinct-count optical scan.

Executive Summary of the Report

I. The AVC Advantage 9.00 is easily “hacked,” by the installation of fraudulent firmware. This is done by prying just one ROM chip from its socket and pushing a new one in, or by replacement of the Z80 processor chip. We have demonstrated that this “hack” takes just 7 minutes to perform.

The fraudulent firmware can steal votes during an election, just as its criminal designer programs it to do. The fraud cannot practically be detected. There is no paper audit trail on this machine; all electronic records of the votes are under control of the firmware, which can manipulate them all simultaneously.

II. Without even touching a single AVC Advantage, an attacker can install fraudulent firmware into many AVC Advantage machines by viral propagation through audio-ballot cartridges. The virus can steal the votes of blind voters, can cause AVC Advantages in targeted precincts to fail to operate; or can cause WinEDS software to tally votes inaccurately. (WinEDS is the program, sold by Sequoia, that each County’s Board of Elections uses to add up votes from all the different precincts.)

III. Design flaws in the user interface of the AVC Advantage disenfranchise voters, or violate voter privacy, by causing votes not to be counted, and by allowing pollworkers to commit fraud.

IV. AVC Advantage Results Cartridges can be easily manipulated to change votes, after the polls are closed but before results from different precincts are cumulated together.

V. Sequoia’s sloppy software practices can lead to error and insecurity. Wyle’s ITA reports are not rigorous, and are inadequate to detect security vulnerabilities. Programming errors that slip through these processes can miscount votes and permit fraud.

VI. Anomalies noticed by County Clerks in the New Jersey 2008 Presidential Primary were caused by two different programming errors on the part of Sequoia, and had the effect of disenfranchising voters.

VII. The AVC Advantage has been produced in many versions. The fact that one version may have been examined for certification does not give grounds for confidence in the security and accuracy of a different version. New Jersey should not use any version of the AVC Advantage that it has not actually examined with the assistance of skilled computer-security experts.

VIII. The AVC Advantage is too insecure to use in New Jersey. New Jersey should immediately implement the 2005 law passed by the Legislature, requiring an individual voter-verified record of each vote cast, by adopting precinct-count optical-scan voting equipment.”

Read more:

http://citp.princeton.edu/voting/advantage/