April 07, 2005
Bombshell: King County admits the Mail Ballot Report is bogus

In Thursday's Seattle Times, King County admits that the Mail Ballot Report is bogus:

King County election officials said a key document accounting for absentee ballots in the November election was so flawed it was virtually meaningless.

The Mail Ballot Report, which showed every absentee ballot accounted for, didn't report the correct number of ballots returned by voters. Instead, it simply added the number of ballots counted and the number rejected to show a perfectly matching number of ballots returned.

Score! That confirms my suspicions about the Mail Ballot Report that I first reported ... a month ago.

The admission that the Mail Ballot Report is bogus is a very big deal. The canvassing board relied on this report to certify the election. If in fact the report deliberately covered up material facts about the election returns (say, that hundreds more ballots were counted than should have been counted) then not only should the election be set aside, but there should also be a criminal investigation.

What King County officials did not say is how many absentee ballots really were returned. That number would shed more light on the mysterious discrepancy of 881 more absentee ballots counted than identifiable valid absentee voters. (hint: check if the total number of absentee ballots actually returned is less than the sum of the total number of ballots counted and the total number of ballots rejected) King County Elections has to know how many absentee ballots were actually returned. It's in the Absentee Ballot Audit Trail, which they have not yet released, even though I've been asking for it for weeks. Anybody care to guess why they're stonewalling on its release?

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 07, 2005 01:17 AM | Email This
Comments
1. OOOOOHHHH! Pick me! Pick me!

Is it because they're a bunch of bumbling crooks?

Posted by: Hoystory on April 7, 2005 01:41 AM
2. Capital punishment for Democrat voter felons!! [Like roaches, you've got to kill them all!]

Posted by: JCH on April 7, 2005 01:50 AM
3. Why are they stonewalling on the release of the Absentee Ballot Audit Trail, you ask? Come on, it's April 2005 - the election was in November 2004 - that was only like, five months ago...

It takes time to doctor up a report. I hear Dan Rather is available to help now that he's no longer on CBS Evening News. He has experience in creating fake Texas National Guard memos, so I'm sure he'd be of great service to King County Elections.

Posted by: YourGovernorCostsMillion$ on April 7, 2005 02:05 AM
4. I would like to know why provisional ballots were accepted from at least 91 people who returned absentee ballots. Your 03/23/2005 posting, "Absentee Ballot Mystery Deepens".

http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/004036.html

"Of the 531,263 voter ids outside of the 32nd district, I get the following matches:
528,923 voters credited absentee in the voter database;
2,215 voters not credited
91 voters credited provisional
34 voters not found in the voter database"

Why are these 91 voters credited provisional?

They returned an absentee ballot! At least their voter ID's are listed as having returned an absentee ballot!

Their provisional ballot should have been rejected, since they had already returned an absentee ballot!

Who are these 91 voters? You must have the ability to identify them! Why don't you post a file with all of their names, addresses, registration ID's, and precinct numbers?

Apparently, these 91 voters not only cast BOTH absentee and provisional ballots, but their provisional ballots were counted. I would be willing to bet that their absentee ballots were counted as well.

This would explain a portion of the 881 voterless absentee ballots, since these 91 people aren't on the listed of credited ABSENTEE voters, even though the absentee ballots they returned were probably counted.

Posted by: Richard Pope on April 7, 2005 02:06 AM
5. I would like to know why provisional ballots were accepted from at least 91 people who returned absentee ballots. Your 03/23/2005 posting, "Absentee Ballot Mystery Deepens".

http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/004036.html

"Of the 531,263 voter ids outside of the 32nd district, I get the following matches:
528,923 voters credited absentee in the voter database;
2,215 voters not credited
91 voters credited provisional
34 voters not found in the voter database"

Why are these 91 voters credited provisional?

They returned an absentee ballot! At least their voter ID's are listed as having returned an absentee ballot!

Their provisional ballot should have been rejected, since they had already returned an absentee ballot!

Who are these 91 voters? You must have the ability to identify them! Why don't you post a file with all of their names, addresses, registration ID's, and precinct numbers?

Apparently, these 91 voters not only cast BOTH absentee and provisional ballots, but their provisional ballots were counted. I would be willing to bet that their absentee ballots were counted as well.

This would explain a portion of the 881 voterless absentee ballots, since these 91 people aren't on the listed of credited ABSENTEE voters, even though the absentee ballots they returned were probably counted.

Posted by: Richard Pope on April 7, 2005 02:06 AM
6. Sorry -- didn't mean to post that one twice. But now I understand how double posting happens :)

Posted by: Richard Pope on April 7, 2005 02:11 AM
7. YES! The beginning of the end is at hand. Absolutely wonderful work Stefan! Heads will (should) roll.

I'm sure Queen G is going to be very disappointed by the sloppy and inadvertent handling of this situation. Who is responsible? Off with their heads!

Remember Ron (the mail man) Sims said, "After reviewing this report, I believe the people of King County can have full confidence in the elections operations."
Run Ron run!

Oh, and remember Dean (O-crat) Logan saying, "These are legitimate voters who cast legitimate ballots. It's just a travesty if we do not include these ballots."
Duck and cover Dean!

Don't forget Paul (handy count) Berendt's quote, "We want every vote to be counted. We are taking steps in the Supreme Court to do just that, and to ensure that every ballot will be treated the same in every county throughout the state."
Head for the hills Paul!

Sam (rubber stamp) Reed may want to revise his statement, "While there were mistakes, at this time there is nothing that appears fraudulent."
So, what is your job Sam?

It's going to be a good day.. Enjoy!

Posted by: Splatter on April 7, 2005 02:27 AM
8. This is beginning to read like 'Dumb Crook News'.

They can't release what they can't remember, the TRUTH!

Sefan,
LET THAT DOG HUNT!!
With all this OBVIOUS illegal activity, will the court session need go past lunch?

Posted by: Arky on April 7, 2005 04:43 AM
9. I wonder if the Feds can get the King County administration charged under RICO now?

Machine politics is dead, viva le blopshpere!

Ms. Gregoire, your 15 minutes of infamy are up. So to Sims, Logan, and that whole monkey barrel of crooks running King County.

Posted by: Anna on April 7, 2005 05:04 AM
10. This is like watching a train wreck in slow motion...in HDTV.

Posted by: dkpcowboy on April 7, 2005 05:31 AM
11. Don't get over confident. The Times article has three points to ponder: 1. DOJ says "call the FBI": Recall the fanfare when the FBI came into the Pierce County Brame case and then disappeared. Isn't this a civil rights issue that the DOJ deserving of a grand jury? 2. King County excuses the mistakes on shortcuts taken by overworked staff due to the unexpected, overwhelming number of absentee ballots. This same excuse was used in Pierce County circa 1996 to justify a secret ballot remarking/enhancement center in a warehouse owned by an electricians union. 3. The article quotes Bobbie Egan as stating "We welcome any authorized investigation," Egan said. She noted that her office was organizing an investigation with the help of auditors from other counties." I'm assuming she will be relying on the County Auditors Association ... once headed by Reed and the former Pierce County Auditor that fabricated her educational credentials. The association, rather than the secretary of state, controls elections. You can bet that they don't want to see Logan (and Pierce County's Auditor) criticized for things that others may have done.

Posted by: Newman on April 7, 2005 05:46 AM
12. Y A W N!

Are you people still talking about this? It's over! You lost! Shut up! I'm not crazy, you're crazy! Stop talking about this, or I'll hold my breath until I turn blue! Tom DeLay! Tom Delay! Tom DeLay! AAAAAAIIIIIIEEEEEEE!!!!!

Posted by headless dan nelsonwitz

Posted by: ScottM on April 7, 2005 06:06 AM
13. Headles I hope you still feel this way on a couple of months when the big uhaul shows up at the governors mansion.

Posted by: Your-government-cost-billions on April 7, 2005 06:42 AM
14. I distinctly remember reading that article. This is quite amazing that Stefan can have so much impact on media coverage, even if most of his input is unacknowledged.

Posted by: zapporo on April 7, 2005 06:53 AM
15. Making a pre-emptive strike, are we Scott?

I do think you've captured the essence ;'}

Posted by: alphabet soup on April 7, 2005 07:04 AM
16. Nice one ScottM.

Posted by: dkpcowboy on April 7, 2005 07:06 AM
17. This entire election process was bogus courtesy of Sims-Logan & Company.
Where the heck is Ms. Fraud-o-ire's Great Healing (Heeling) Tour?
Maybe she can "heel" this election model.


Posted by: JG on April 7, 2005 07:36 AM
18. EXCUSE ME....
ISN'T FRAUD THE INTENTIONAL MISLEADING OF SOMEONE....(with a few other important qualifiers).

Did King County elections Div. commit civil fraud in the issuing of the report and having the election certified against the people of King County and the State of Washington?

Is this a class action lawsuit in the making at least for a civil fraud case, where maybe Rossi can claim a real and demonstrated monitary loss?

Perhaps the Republican representative (from the County Attorney's office) on the Canvasing Board, and who certified the election was the victim of Fraud. The County Attorney's office?

Oh, my this could get interesting.

It might not be classic "Chicago-election fraud," but it is beginning to sould a lot like...

FRAUD...FRAUD...FRAUD...FRAUD...FRAUD...FRAUD
Hmm. This could get interesting!

Posted by: Bob on April 7, 2005 07:39 AM
19. Hey Scott, have to admit you made me laugh. 'cours I have to admit you've got some pretty good material to work with here, too.

Posted by: Unkl Witz on April 7, 2005 07:42 AM
20. Ok, so the Democrats were asking the judge to "delay" the trial for 6 months. I'm thinking that now they're probably wishing they had agreed to a quick and speedy trial months ago. More and more information and evidence is going to come forward. The cover-up is not working. They are going to be buried!

Posted by: Larry in Renton on April 7, 2005 07:46 AM
21. Interesting shift for the ordinarily left-leaning King County Journal, along with a fairly revealing poll:

http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/203505

Thanks for all the great work Stefan!

Posted by: DanC on April 7, 2005 07:54 AM
22. Has anyone else noticed how the "folks" at HA.org have studiously avoided all discussion of these recent (and devastating for them) developments?

...Nothing about the Dems 'we-want-6 months' loss
...Nothing about KC firings
...Noting about bogus ballot reports
...Nothing about found ballots
...Nothing about Lt Suits and his missing vote
...Nothing about Jenny and her 'auto test' for voters
...Nothing about the drunken spending spree the dems in Olympia are conducting...

Nothing, nothing, nothing.

But gosh, they covered the death of Prince Rainier and the monthy (weekly? daily? hourly?) liberal drink fest!

Whoa! Little threat of relevance there!

Posted by: Cheryl on April 7, 2005 08:00 AM
23. Hey, other than drinking heavily, how else would you react to the steady stream of 'boo-boos' slowly leaking out of King County?

Posted by: Unkl Witz on April 7, 2005 08:45 AM
24. Wow, the results of that poll speak volumes. When I voted at 9:05am, it was 84.3% saying Logan should resign or be fired.

Apparently Ron Sims only looks at polls that he agrees with.

Posted by: Jason on April 7, 2005 09:05 AM
25. Yes you wonder why HA is not talking about this? well it is because they practice SOUND politics. not unsound politics. They realize that there is more that is happening to effect us than 2 Asian voters not included in a Seattle Times story. The Rainier post obviously was above your comprehension....try having an adult read it to you and explaining the subtle nuances. As for the Drinking...what the heck, drinking is always a good story.
As for Stephan Quioxte here, good luck, but don't forget to blame those Liberal judges when it gets thrown out again, because you just can't prove fraud....He He He.
One question for you windmillers. If there was going to be organized Fraud, why do it only for 129 votes?
Let's do it right like in Ohio and Florida, so we can make the claim that the numbers wouldn't make a difference.
"Now that's the Chicago way"

PS Tom Delay pulled the plug on his dad. then used his brother the Trial lawyer to sue the company that made the faulty lift. figured he was done sueing, so he changed the laws for the rest of us, so if we get hurt by faulty equipment, we can't go after his base.
How do you guys live with yourselves?....corporate sheep
Hammer the Hammer.

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 09:26 AM
26. Unkl - I've got to hand it to you, unlike the others that disagree (respectfully or otherwise) you have the honesty to stay on and say that this is becoming pretty obviously true (court case to decide).

I think that is all most people wanted on this blog, an honest assessment of the election that looked 'suspicious'.

Posted by: Fred on April 7, 2005 09:28 AM
27. "Anybody care to guess why they're stonewalling on its release?"

Because that beaver they're using as a shredder is really old and really slow.

Posted by: Jeff H on April 7, 2005 09:34 AM
28. "Anybody care to guess why they're stonewalling on its release?"

Because the authors are trying to emigrate to Cuba. Or Canada. And finding that other countries actually screen immigrants.

Posted by: Al on April 7, 2005 09:36 AM
29. Liberalism is a philosophy of convenience. Whatever you want to believe is okay, regardless of any facts.

Liberal rule #4: When in doubt, create a diversion.

Posted by: Larry on April 7, 2005 09:37 AM
30. Neo-con rule #1
When in doubt, start a war. then feed the base with the profiteering.

Oh where oh where has my 9 billion gone? Oh where oh where can it be? (sung to tune of "let the eagle soar")

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 09:47 AM
31. Liberal rule #2: If it feels good, it must be right.
Liberal rule #3: If it feels right, than everyone else is wrong and intolerant and must be a NAZI pig.

Posted by: Son of Liberty on April 7, 2005 09:51 AM
32. danw, while we are off topic:

FDR - WWII
Kennedy - Vietnam
Clinton - Bosnia

What a bunch of neo-cons!

Posted by: Fred on April 7, 2005 10:03 AM
33. Neo-con rule #1
When in doubt, start a war. then feed the base with the profiteering.

How cute.

Get a job.

Posted by: swassociates on April 7, 2005 10:03 AM
34. Liberal rule #5:

It doesn't matter how many innocent civilians are killed by a brutal dictator. But if one terrorist dressed as a civilian is killed by US troops, it's a war crime.

danw,

You obviously have a difficult time sticking to the topic. I don't know you, so I don't know if it's a serious medical condition (attention deficit disorder) or short attention span caused by too many bong hits.

We're discussing King County and Washington State politics here. If you have nothing useful to contribute.....adieu, okay?

Posted by: Larry on April 7, 2005 10:04 AM
35. Hey DanW, any comments on the ballots?
No?
That's what I thought.

Posted by: YourGovernorCostsMillion$ on April 7, 2005 10:06 AM
36. GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAALLLL!!!!!!

scored by YourGovernor!!!

Posted by: dkpcowboy on April 7, 2005 10:15 AM
37. Let's see...they haven't released the audit trail because......I know-- they wanted to get it all nicely laminated so it would look reeeal nice and so no one could spill coffee on it and ruin it and.......no? That's not it?

Posted by: Michele on April 7, 2005 10:21 AM
38. It has now been conclusively proven that national right-wing blogs were way off base and lied to make it appear that the now-famous Schiavo Senate memo was a "Democratic dirty trick."

In fact, in case you missed it, Republican Sen. Mel Martinez, of Fla., the floor leader for the GOP on the Schiavo legislation, has admitted that the Chief Legal Counsel on his staff did indeed write the memo and he (Sen. Martinez) did indeed personally show the memo to Dem. Sen. Tom Harkin as the major media all CORRECTLY reported.

So there's been wrongheaded and misleading posting over this all over the right wing blog and radio outlets.

Some are, of course, embarrassed and confessing to being foolish in trusting Republicans. Others are stonewalling.

When will you characters finally admit here that you're all wet also about this election? It was a close race. Gregoire won, Rossi loss.

We'll be waiting for you to admit being embarrassed over the phony controversy and confessing to being foolish in trusting Republicans.

We know now that the national Republicans are phonies and lie all the time. (Martinez denied for weeks that his office had anything to do with that memo; now he finally admits it and says the guy who wrote it -- his head lawyer! -- has resigned). Why should anyone believe the local people? They're cut from the same cloth.

Posted by: Nelson on April 7, 2005 10:26 AM
39. Larry;
Seems like you really only want the circle here.
Do you have an O'Reilly complex? "cut his mike"
I will try to stay within the sound for you, no matter how unsound.
Here we go;
I sure wish we had commited fraud in a larger way so there would be no tilting at windmills.(facitious, just in case you didn't get it)
Yes I am concerned about mistakes, there, happy? but does it rise to the level of fraud? Does Adams County(sorry not in the "sound") rise to the level of Fraud? It is what it is. a close election with the same mistakes that aren't caught in a none close election. but still no fraud.
But I am sure if we can get those Liberal judges replaced, we can get the results we need.
But again on my last post, Larry I was on subject with asking, Why fraud for only 129 votes?

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 10:31 AM
40. Danw & Nelson,

Do you actually read the topic before you start posting or are you just the devil's advocate to the end? King County screwed up they admitted it, they are going to sink in this pile of lies they created. So what is to debate?

Posted by: Adriel on April 7, 2005 10:36 AM
41. Hey guys, Puddybud reporting in from south of San Francisco. On the 560 KSFO show Les and Melanie show this morning at 7:33 AM they mentioned the WA State "Govenor Election Fiasco". They discussed the trial date, the King County election problems with '000s of bad votes, and the fact most high level judges are Democratic in WA State.

Unfortunately their take on the fiasco was slightly negative. California Republicans down here they feel that the Democrats have a good chance of stopping the challenge in Supreme Court because of their past experience of California judges, most recently last years governator race with Arnold!! They wonder if the WA Democratic Supreme Court will be impartial.

So California radio talk shows are covering the issue. I didn't have a call in number to ask if they read the Shark's blog.

NUFF SAID!!!!

Pudster

Posted by: Puddybud on April 7, 2005 10:37 AM
42. Notice the typical liberal reflex at work from the usual suspects.

Attempt to change the subject when the argument can't be refuted with logic and facts.

KC bungles the election, threatening the legitimacy of your fraudulent governess? Then chat about windmills and wind direction.

Posted by: Shaun on April 7, 2005 10:41 AM
43. The number one goal of leftists is maintain power, no matter what. Sims-Logan know this.
They are currently looking for a scapegoat for their own mistakes.

We have been GreGored: Steal the election and tax 'em to death.

"Anybody care to guess why they're stonewalling on its release?"

Because first they have to "Loganize" the report.

Posted by: JG on April 7, 2005 10:43 AM
44. Adriel;
Hello; Knock knock anyone home up there? Posting "soundly"
Screwed up...not commited fraud. Need proof of Fraud...not incompetence.
Are we posting to you satisfaction now?

PS Tom Delay is going to burn (sorry it slipped out) I am sure he has been to the "sound". some sound, any sound.

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 10:44 AM
45. Y A W N

Is that you again Nelson,

It's really comical how all of you silly liberals get yourselves in an uproar over an issue that over, done & closed.

Schiavo is dead, moveon.u (God rest her soul)

Posted by: Doc Right2life on April 7, 2005 10:47 AM
46. The only number on that mail ballot report that has any basis in fact is the number alongside the words "Total number accepted as valid and counted" -- and even it isn't what the words say it is.

The words are misleading. Most people would read them to mean that the number accepted as valid equals the number on which the votes were counted.

564,222 is simply the number of absentee ballots that their final tabulation showed had gone through the vote count.

It is not equal to the number of absentee ballots accepted as valid.

When Logan's Nov. 15 report of absentee ballots accepted as valid and counted contained an error, they had to know that something was badly wrong.

They reported a cumulative total of absentee ballots counted which was 4,326 more than the cumulative total in the previous report on Nov. 12.

But, the number of ballots added to the vote count which was reported in that Nov. 15 report indicates they counted the votes on 4,675 absentee ballots -- not 4,326.

Logan simply stopped including the cumulative total of absentee ballots included in the vote count after that Nov. 15 report.

As is now apparent, the numbers for regular polling place ballots, provisional ballots accepted as valid and included in the vote count, and absentee ballots accepted as valid and included in the vote count were all incorrectly reported by Logan's gang.

The Mail Ballot Report was not an accurate statement.

The Provisional Ballot Report was not an accurate statement.

The report released on Nov. 3 which stated that 305,380 polling place ballots were cast and counted was never changed -- yet it, too, was not an accurate statement.

Someone needs to grab every piece of computer equipment in that place and go searching for the numbers that will show how many valid absentee ballots there were.

Logan's gang didn't include the number of absentee ballots accepted as valid in that mail ballot report. I suspect they omitted that number for the simple reason that it is less than the number of absentee ballots that went through the vote tabulation process.

So far as I can tell, the computerized record system may be the only place the truth (or a lingering hint of it) can be found.

Posted by: Micajah on April 7, 2005 10:52 AM
47. Perhaps Stefan can post a topic whereby we could learn the trolls' opinion of Chappaquidick, Grand Dragon of the KKK Byrd, Clinton's technology lay-down to the ChiComs, Carter's Desert One, Lewinsky, Whitewater, FBI Files, Travelgate, HillaryCare, Chicago 1960, LBJ South Texas, Barney Frank the Madam, NJ Governor 2004, et al.

Nah...not interested in what the trolls think of anything, quite frankly, since it would dove-tail with what they think of KC. It doesn't matter as long as the Dums are in charge.

Posted by: dkpcowboy on April 7, 2005 10:56 AM
48. With all the errors and mistakes that have occurred in this election it is painfully clear that Christine was (temporarily) elected by mistake.

Posted by: Jack on April 7, 2005 10:56 AM
49. danw,

Normally I don't comment on someone's spelling, syntax, grammar, and punctuation, because I assume that minor slip-ups happen when people are upset and posting.

I feel compelled to in this case, though. Where did you go to school? Did they teach you proper grammar?

Reading your comments is like driving through 18 miles of construction work. Your lack of proper grammar, syntax, and punctuation seriously impedes your ability to communicate your illogical ideas.

An answer to your question - the fraud committed was for FAR MORE than 129 votes. It was at least 420 (the first margin) plus 129. The answer is that the fraud was probably in the thousands or tens of thousands of votes.

Your question makes about as much sense as asking why Jason Giambi took steroids to help the Yankees win 5-4? He was taking them all along, and the margin just happened to fall at that level. But the fraud committed was on a much grander scale.

Posted by: Larry on April 7, 2005 10:58 AM
50. Danw

How many screw ups does it take to be Incompetance? or better yet how many for fraud? I just want to know so that when it hits that magic number I can call it what it is. Thank you for your absolute God-like insight into this matter, if only we could all close our eyes and hope for things to be perfect and not see imperfection in this fiasco. Danw joins the ranks of ignorance with HeadlessLucy.

Posted by: Adriel on April 7, 2005 10:59 AM
51. "Why fraud for only 129 votes? "

That's an easy one, Dan W.....

The Dem's thought that they would win the election with the 'normal' amount of fraud in the beginning. Their confidence was too high. They didn't bother to overstuff what they were going to win anyhow. It's expensive and an unnecessary risk. Additionally, when the polls forecast a close election, it's bad form to overstuff the ballot boxes when you expect to win anyhow.
Bottom line: Bad pre-election forecasting by the Dems.

When they lost the first count (and boy were they surprised), they had to pad just enough to win the second- you can't have a huge upset in the recount. However, murphy's law intervened, and somebody, somewhere, screwed up in padding the recount. Damn. You just can't get good help these days. Somewhere, George Soros (or his Washington State equivalent) was shouting, "You're fired!" to a luckless campaign worker.

Now forced to a third count, the Dems had to be extremely cautious. Just enough to declare victory, but with the least amount of exposure possible - too many votes in the opposite direction makes it clear that the fix has been put in. Not enough makes it possible to demand another recount. How many are enough? Better make it at least a hundred, but not too many over a hundred. Never make it a round number, too neat is too suspicious. 114? Too low. 143? Where'd THOSE come from? Compromise: 129. Agreed.

However, even this raised suspicions. Perhaps they should have gone with 79 like somebody suggested.

Clear now?


Posted by: Lokki on April 7, 2005 10:59 AM
52. "It's a long, long road

with many a winding turn,

that leads us to who knows where

(who knows where).

But while we're on the way to there

why not share? (Why not share?)
Pat Boone from, "He's Not Heavy , He's My Brother"


So, I'll share this with you: Richard Pope is right. You'll all look pretty foolish when the story comes out that your supposedly brilliant expose' is more like a Laurel and Hardy short. Who'll be the Dem. to swat the Republican Laurel in the head while exclaiming: "You idiot!! You've gone and done it again again!"

I hope it's me.

Posted by: headless lucy on April 7, 2005 11:02 AM
53. "Hello; Knock knock anyone home up there? Posting "soundly"
Screwed up...not commited fraud. Need proof of Fraud...not incompetence.
Are we posting to you satisfaction now?

PS Tom Delay is going to burn"

Interesting post DANW! The first part is demanding proof. Your PS has no proof attached. Lib consistency in action!

This blog is trying to find the truth, giving opinions and helping find info for heading to court for a legal answer. At least there are data here for the election (that means numbers, statements, and other hard data most of which comes from the "system" itself). What data, not quotes from unsubstantiated sources (NYT) or hearsay, do you have for Delay?

Posted by: Fred on April 7, 2005 11:05 AM
54. Let's just suppose that you get your way and there's a re-vote. With even the Wall St Journal dissing Delay, where do you think Rossi's going to weigh in on this scandal? I can see the national headlines now: Dino Rossi, WA Republican, denounces Tom Delay!

Posted by: amused by hot air on April 7, 2005 11:17 AM
55. brainless, the number of ballots (93 give or take) isn't the issue. KC admitted that their documentation which partly justified certification of the election was a crock. You know this, but are satisfied with malfeasance as long as your side wins. Honorable people would prefer to lose honestly than win by cheating. (Keyword...Honorable)

Posted by: dkpcowboy on April 7, 2005 11:21 AM
56. amused,

Why does Rossi even have to mention Delay? Were they buddies? What's Gregoire going to say about Clinton and Whitewater? What's Gregoire going to say about Terry Shiavo?

Moot: So hypothetical as to be meaningless.

Here's the real question for you: If there's a vote again this November, what will Gregoire say about Dean Logan? What will Gregoire say about the 'model election'?

Posted by: Larry on April 7, 2005 11:23 AM
57. Re: Delay et al. For the left, the real issue is finding someone guilty of being conservative/republican. From then on, the matter becomes finding something to hang him/her on.

It's the complete reverse of when a person is left/lib/democrat, where even a smoking gun is not a smoking gun. 'course, if you leave the reservation, you become worse than a con/rep.

In either case, facts matter less than demographics and affiliations.

Posted by: scott158 on April 7, 2005 11:30 AM
58. Fantastic work Stefan. It was your initial exposure of this and subsequent pressure that has floated this up to the level that now the MSM is onboard.

Thank you!

Posted by: Jeff B. on April 7, 2005 11:33 AM
59. Thank God for diligent citizens! I just wonder how you find the energy and time to do all of this research, but I'm grateful you do.

Looks like heads will have to roll.

Posted by: Greg M on April 7, 2005 11:36 AM
60. The answer to Doc's rhetorical question--Hey, other than drinking heavily, how else would you react to the steady stream of 'boo-boos' slowly leaking out of King County?--clearly is "change the subject". Or drink heavily, then try to change the subject.

Must be starting to hurt...you fools are sounding desperate. Ohio and Delay indeed.

Posted by: iconoclast on April 7, 2005 11:37 AM
61. Not Amused by Headless Lucy's Hot Air......not at all...it's pathetic...Why don't you go back to chasing cars or something...

Posted by: Saltherring on April 7, 2005 11:47 AM
62. Fred;
I am sorry I am not allowed to write about national politics in the "sound". but since I am only posting a reply (Okay larry?) about facts about Tom Delay, How about the "House Ethics committee" try a little "google" and pick your own newspaper for Delay, Ethics committee,and admonished. (he gotta little tired of them, so he replaced the real Republican on the committee,with his shills)

Back on topic; (please stop moving off topic you guys)

Thank you Lokki;
That is perfectly clear, that is the best scenario I have seen. would make a good movie.

Larry; I'll work on the Grammer for you, thank you for weeding through it. 18 miles?


Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 11:56 AM
63. "Oh what a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive." Looks like the dems are caught.

Posted by: Vicki on April 7, 2005 12:00 PM
64. Cheryl at April 7, 2005 08:00 AM

Exactly the point I was going to make. They have grown deathly silent. I have posted over there to try an stir it up. We'll see what kind of excuses they come up with to explain this away, as to keep their "Model Election" fairy tale alive.

Posted by: Chris on April 7, 2005 12:01 PM
65. Regarding the Logan Sims relationship.
With all the hype about how great Logan was it kind of reminded me of a minor leaguer in baseball that was pretty good. Then when you called him up to the bigs he couldn't hit major league pitching.
Sometimes hype is just hype. I find it odd that as recently as Monday Sims still kept repeating that we should be lucky to have Logan as our elections head and he is one of the best in the country.
A few dem. council members seem to have woken up to the fact that they were lied to. Still Sims is ok that he was handed a knowingly bogus election report a few months ago. If you were ever unsure about the claims that Sims lacked integrity and honesty this should clear that issue up. Through Logan Sims has been exposed as a party hack, less then genuine, and not too bright. It has become completely clear that we need to make our election director an elected position.

Posted by: Joe on April 7, 2005 12:02 PM
66. It's spelled "grammar" you dolt.

And don't say you did it on purpose. You're not that bright.

Posted by: jimg on April 7, 2005 12:05 PM
67. Thenks Jimg

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 12:10 PM
68. Just a gentle thought to all of you who, like me, are addicted to this wonderful site . . . . I hope you are leaving change in the tip jar on a regular basis. No way could we compensate for all of the time spent by these diligent, intelligent folks, but we should at the very least make sure we more than adequately cover their out-of-pocket expenses. Personally, I try to contribute something every couple of weeks, even if it is not a lot. Deprive yourself of a couple of lattes or a movie . . . this site is more than worth it!

Posted by: lksimstrailgrammy on April 7, 2005 12:14 PM
69. danw - that admonishing Delay got is old history, is that all you can dreg up to change the subject?

At least he wasn't impeached and disbarred, but then again the 'poor conduct' bar was set pretty high by Clinton for anyone to beat!

So politicians are not angels on either side, but the relevance here is what again?

Posted by: Fred on April 7, 2005 12:17 PM
70. The Libs, tending to be the paranoid group they are, believe the only way to win an election is to lie, cheat and steal it. Pretty sad. In this case they obviously stole the election through deceit. Hope this mess gets cleared up soon. My voting pen is getting anxious..... The fat lady is singing at full volume! See ya Christine!

Tom

Posted by: Tom on April 7, 2005 12:20 PM
71. Fred;
Quit getting off topic, Larry is going to string me and my tenth grade english teacher up.
The new news is of his undisclosed, illegal paid trips to Russia and the Orient by lobbyists.
The reason no disbarement goes back to him changing the Ethics committee into a toothless former shell of itself. talk about your waste of government money. stay tuned.

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 12:30 PM
72. I tipped a modest chunk, but usefulwork didn't cash my check for about a month and a half. Is cash needed?

Posted by: Andy_ on April 7, 2005 12:36 PM
73. Come now, children. Don't play with the naughty kids down the block. Why do you waste your time answering the D Dolts who only post here to annoy you. Remember your good home training. Ignore the kids who are taunting you, and they will go away. Meanwhile, let's get back to business. So many of you are positively brilliant. Let's get away from the "chat room of the buddies" atmosphere and return to the blog of the brilliant. It is such a joy to read your truly bright ideas and remarks! Minds like yours are what has turned this whole debacle around!

Posted by: lksimstrailgrammy on April 7, 2005 12:39 PM
74. Stefan is on 710 AM right now 12:40pm with Dori Monson.

Posted by: Joe on April 7, 2005 12:41 PM
75. Andy - that's interesting. I have no idea of their financial needs. I just know that they have remarked that they have expenses involved with keeping the web site active, and I recall that they spent a bundle on the binder and other documents. Maybe they were just too busy to cash the money. I send it through Paypal, so who knows if they use it. I just thought we should do our part to show appreciation. This site is invaluable!

Posted by: lksimstrailgrammy on April 7, 2005 12:49 PM
76. I give up. Why bother talking to Democrats when they apparently believe that the goverment can create daylight?

(Read the Markey quote in the second-to-last paragraph.)

Posted by: ScottM on April 7, 2005 12:51 PM
77. Richard Pope,

If I understand the process correctly, 91 voters
mailed-in an absentee ballot, and attempted to
cast an absentee ballot. Since the ballots are
not suppose to be seperated from from the
envelope until after that vote has been found
legitimate, a subpeona of those 91 ballots will
answer the question as to whether, or not, those
ballots were counted twice.

If King County can produce the sealed absentee,
or provisional ballots, they were not counted
twice. If they cannot, the ballots were counted
twice.

Posted by: Bob on April 7, 2005 12:57 PM
78. Danw,

If you want to talk about Delay and the travel expenditures, then here we go. Delay accepted a trip from KORUSEC to Asia which lsted itself as a "nonpartisan, not-for-profit group that provides insight on various interests." This was not illegal. Less than a week before taking the trip, they changed their status to a foreign agent which is not allowed. Of course, the paperwork for the change in status didn't get through the system until after his trip.

So actually, we should be looking into all members of congress that accepted these trips AFTER the filing was noted. This would include 9 democrat members including Nancy Pelosi and our own Jim McDermott. So I guess I agree that we should have a FULL investigation of ALL members that took those trips and not just Delay. What say you now?

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pfeiffer200503150957.asp

Posted by: Ken on April 7, 2005 12:58 PM
79. It is so interesting to see how the liberals react to this news. They have the ‘Yeah but.” and the “ But what about…”. I wish we had this blog during the whole Clinton impeachment and Monica episode. It is so fun to see logic give way hysteria and hate. Rossi is a good man, he was cheated in the election of 2004, people will pay for it with their jobs and reputation. And if Rossi should try to steal an election or have it out with an intern or sell national secrets to China, I’ll braid a rope for him politically too. Its only fair.

Posted by: PoliSi on April 7, 2005 01:02 PM
80. The D Dolts are getting more and more shrill as this horrible crime unfolds. Expect them to go up a couple more octaves before it is over.

Posted by: lksimstrailgrammy on April 7, 2005 01:05 PM
81. This whole mess is starting to look less and less Machivellian, and more and more Curly, Larry and Moe.

Posted by: Vexorg on April 7, 2005 01:07 PM
82. Hey PoliSi! We don't want fair, we want democrats! We at least know what is best for you!

Yours Truthfully,
Howard "I hate republicans" Dean

Posted by: Fred on April 7, 2005 01:07 PM
83. danw;

"undisclosed"??? You might want to read those articles again. The only reason they know about the payments to his family and the trip to Russia is because the information was disclosed on his financial disclosure forms. No attempt to hide them as you insinuate.

You might want to work on your accuracy along with your spelling and grammar.

Posted by: Jay on April 7, 2005 01:11 PM
84. Moe, Larry, Curly! Moe, Larry, Curly! "I'm trying to think and nothing happens"

Posted by: Knuckleheads on April 7, 2005 01:17 PM
85. An interesting part of the story is the number of elections workers that are suspended and unavailable for comment. At this late date in the game, we are still discovering more new developments of valid absentee ballots that weren't counted in the election? How are we ever to put this to rest? Unless you are on the Republican side, the answer appears to be by covering it up and hoping it all goes away. You know, "something will happen," maybe blame it on Tom Delay or sunspots.

Elections-office spokeswoman Bobbie Egan said absentee-ballot facility chief Nicole Way didn't correctly account for ballots, but they don’t know why. Former Elections Manager Bob Bruce says "Oh, she knows better than that," referring to Way, and then says “I don't think any of them [referring to the suspended elections workers] would even have thought of doing that." [obviously referring to intentional misbehaivor] Obvious obfuscation. --Paraphrase of Seattle Times article Slade Gorton calls for criminal probe of election, April 7, 2005.

It is understandable, that they might need to "put a lid" on this thing until they "sort it out." However, simply saying "We welcome any authorized investigation," after months of misdirection and stone walling just makes it look more and more like what it probably is--fraud. Today Slade Gorton called for an investigation, State Democratic Party attorney Jenny Durkan called this "hypocritical beyond belief," and the elections office continues to cover it all up.

"The six Republicans on the Metropolitan King County Council on Monday asked U.S. Attorney General Albert Gonzales to order an investigation of the election. The seven Democrats called for an outside audit of the elections office."--Quote Id

What this all adds up to is another situation where the democrats will simply stone wall, delay (not Tom Delay DanW), and obfuscate their way out of responsibility for their crimes. Their offer of an outside audit while nice, is another way to avoid the truth. If any election was ever seized by a Republican in Washington State, the Clinton Administration would have had Janet Reno, the ATF, FBI, and Society for Ugly Amazon Mothers Against Drunken Fathers crawling all over the place. A Kerry administration would excecute a similar sceniario managed by Attorney General Patty Murray.

It is time for the feds to step in, force a large stethiscope up the corrupt democrats a$$es and resolve the damage caused by their criminal activities.
Principle and law mean nothing; liberal democrats couldn't care less about this so long as they appear to be winning.
Otherwise, THE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN ELECTIONS IS DIRECTLY AT STAKE HERE.

Posted by: Amused by liberals on April 7, 2005 01:20 PM
86. The Truth Will Set You Free!
We can only hope that Ron Sims, Dean Logan, & Sam reed will soon be "Set Free"! Their jobs that is.
Call the next witness.

Posted by: Keith on April 7, 2005 01:24 PM
87. Nelson,

You are the one who is wrongheaded and misleading.

Senator Martinez did not know about the memo because his aide never said anything about it. So the only one guilty of lying is the Senator's aide, who has now paid for his indiscretion.

Harkin was wrong to distribute it to anyone because it was not on official letterhead, was not signed by anyone and he did not confirm it with anyone.

From the Seattle Times:

"The senator said aides had assured him earlier that his office had nothing to do with producing the memo. "I never did an investigation, as such," he said. "I just took it for granted that we wouldn't be that stupid. It was never my intention to in any way politicize this issue."

"In a statement last night, Martinez said Harkin asked him for background information on the bill and that he gave him what he thought was a routine, one-page staff memo. "Unbeknownst to me, instead of my one page on the bill, I had given him a copy of the now infamous memo," the statement said."

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=schiavo07&date=20050407&query=martinez

Posted by: David R on April 7, 2005 01:39 PM
88. David

Maybe he did know about the (Rush Limbaugh and the rest forged) memo?

http://www.civicactions.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Alexander_Strategy

Memo released by former Delay staff member.
Does this guy do anything that isn't disgusting?
If these guys want control of the judges as well, then Zeig Heil.

These Delay things are much more easy to trace than your KC Fraud.

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 02:12 PM
89. Jay;
Undisclosed.
He did not disclose that he was making the trip. when a member of congress goes to a foreign country he must disclose. It's against the Law.
Stay tuned.
How's things in the "sound"?

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 02:16 PM
90. Is Moe really one of the "Pep Boys"? I have to know.

Posted by: headless lucy on April 7, 2005 02:16 PM
91. For those of you who are as challenged by big words as I am, the Washington Post breaks it down pretty nicely.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/daily/graphics/delay_040605.html

TICK TOCK

Posted by: danw on April 7, 2005 02:20 PM
92. danw - It is really easy to trace when it isn't being hidden. That is the difference between Delay (he disclosed openly before hand) and KC, they are still hiding public documents from the public. I know that is just a pesky detail, but you know, that is the way it goes.

Posted by: Fred on April 7, 2005 02:26 PM
93. Why that's some fine detective work, Stefan. Though I can't say I support anything about Rossi, I like the light you've been shining on an area of our democracy that needs much better citizen oversight. Most people find vote tallying too boring to follow--leaving it open to incompetence, fraud, and psychotic machines.

I hope we get some real reform here. And I really hope that Amused by Liberals is not a doctor: that is NOT what you do with a stethoscope...

Posted by: ChrisW on April 7, 2005 02:50 PM
94. Hey, "amused by hot air", you must laugh alot. Must be nice to amuse yourself by sitting in a room by yourself and breathing.

Posted by: Me on April 7, 2005 03:05 PM
95. At the rate new information is coming forward by the time we get to the election trial the "Jury Will Already Be In"!
Oh! but I forget the Democrates still have over a month to discover all of the reasons why this was a Model Election!
Call The Next Witness!

Posted by: Keith on April 7, 2005 03:24 PM
96. YES!!!

Maybe this will be the thing to get the "it's too late" republican crowd to swallow their pessimism. It's crunch time!

Posted by: Mark WWU on April 7, 2005 05:51 PM
97. I joked when this first came out that the Democrats have done a good job here, demonstrating that the Supreme Court was exactly right to shut down the recount in Bush v. Gore. Apparently they only call it the Democratic party, you know, ironically. Like as in, "Oh yeah, we are the, like, democratic party. Didn'tja know?"

Washington, if you are not careful, you might surpass Louisiana as the most politically backwards state in the union. And considering that they once had an election with the campaign "Vote for the crook: it's important" that is saying something.

But on a serious note, last year was the first time in my life i voted straight party. I never did that before almost on principle. But this time, the Democrats demonstrated such a craven desire to win at any cost--even to the soundness of the republic itself--that i felt they had to be punished. It looks like I will have to pull the lever again and again, until the Democrats get the message that some things are simply out of bounds.

P.S.: Maybe the proper route for Wash. State is to say "screw the courts" and go to the legislature and try to impeach and remove Gregoire. Mind you, i don't know how possible that is, but even if she ends up being replaced by another Dem, at least it will send a message.

Posted by: A.W. of Freespeech.com on April 7, 2005 09:04 PM
98. Btw, there are no ifs about it. we are at the stage where a full criminal investigation needs to be conducted.

And if any bad conduct is found, i would argue for brutal sodomy as the punishment.

Posted by: A.W. on April 7, 2005 09:06 PM
99. A.W. Amen. I second the motion, call in the feds now. Like an above comment stated, I too voted a straight Republican ticket for the first time and for the same reasons.

Posted by: CW on April 7, 2005 10:31 PM
100. Headless Lucy... Now I know where you get your name. It wasn't Pat Boone, it was 'The Hollies" circa 1969. But maybe you have something in common with Governor Rossi. For all intents and purposes, that was before both your times. Tee-Hee

Posted by: The Shadow on April 8, 2005 04:12 AM
101. I liked the 'one dictator in civis' comment. Too lazy to scroll back up and see who posted it, but hat tip. Interesting how Hussein who was always video-d in camos is captured in civis. If the US ever invades Cuba Castro will be rumaging through the far end of his closet muttering to himself, "Now what did I do with the Izod sweater?"

Posted by: Jericho on April 8, 2005 11:37 PM
102. On a more serious note:

Get out of Seattle - and King County if you can. I am having serious doubts as to whether that city will be with us by the end of '05.

Not looking to get flamed here - just doing my kingdom duty for Christ. You have been warned as I was in two dreams.

As for you Feds reading this - I'm sure with a little work you will realize that I'm no terrorist and I never even took physics in high school, but if you want to talk to me I'm sure you'll track me down - and then when/if the event happens some blogger will post this with the minimal undead media coverage that it was given when you questioned me. All in all your entire ridiculousness will with my testimony for Christ hopefully help to strengthen the faith of many and save a few others.

I know this was off topic, but hey I figured at least some of you might be interested, even if it is only one - after all there was only one righteous one in Soddom too.

Posted by: Jericho on April 8, 2005 11:45 PM
103. coourage! we will win

Posted by: egan on April 12, 2005 11:15 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?